PRIVY COUNCIL

Departmental Report

John Bercow: To ask the President of the Council when the 2002 Departmental report will be published.

Robin Cook: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury gave on 15 April, Official Report, column 774W.

DEFENCE

Afghanistan

Paul Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which nations have contributed forces to (a) Operation Enduring Freedom and (b) ISAF; how many troops each of these nations has contributed; and if he will make a statement.

Geoff Hoon: Pursuant to the answer I gave on 16 April, Official Report, column 824W, I regret to inform you that there was an error in the table given. The nation of Poland should have read Portugal.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Performance Targets

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the target has been in each of the last five years for efficiency savings as a percentage of total running costs for each of the non-departmental public bodies for which he is responsible; and if the target was met.

John Reid: No New Deal for Young People staff have been employed by non-departmental public bodies in the last four years.

Overtime Payments

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what his policy is on overtime payments for staff in his Department.

John Reid: Overtime work is paid for hours worked in excess of conditioned hours to qualifying grades below the Senior Civil Service at a rate determined according to their overtime band.
	Staff in overtime band 1 (mainly junior grades) receive non-pensionable hourly payments at the rate of time and a half, Monday to Saturday.
	Staff in overtime band 2 (more senior grades) receive non-pensionable hourly payments at plain time rate, Monday to Saturday.
	Staff in grades eligible for overtime receive an additional pensionable payment of half the plain time rate for attendance between the hours of midnight Friday and midnight Saturday. Staff in overtime grades whose pay does not include an element for Sunday attendance, will receive an additional pensionable payment at plain time rate for attendance on Sundays in excess of conditioned hours.
	Very senior staff who are required to work exceptionally long hours for a sustained period may receive an ex-gratia payment.

Parliamentary Questions

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. 
	(1)  how many staff were involved in each of the last three years in preparing draft answers to written parliamentary questions;
	(2)  what the cost was to his Department of answering written parliamentary questions in 2001; and how that cost was calculated.

John Reid: I refer the hon. Member to the answer provided by my right hon. Friend, The Leader of the House of Commons on 17 April 2002.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Foot and Mouth

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what notification was received by her Department concerning the possible death of cattle from foot and mouth-disease at Thornhill Farm, Cwymbach, Aberdare on 4 October 2000; and if she will make a statement.

Margaret Beckett: Inquiries made by the Department indicate that the farmer concerned first informed the National Assembly of Wales (NAW) of his belief that two cattle on his farm had died in August 2000 as a result of foot and mouth disease in a letter dated 3 November 2001 addressed to the First Minister. There is no record of the farmer having made this suggestion to the Department or to the NAW in October 2000, or at any other time prior to his letter of 3 November 2001:
	There was no reason to suspect the presence of foot and mouth disease in the United Kingdom prior to the discovery of the first suspect case on 19 February 2001.

Ozone Depletion

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment her Department has made of the economic viability of replacing ozone depleting substances with non-ozone depleting substances.

Michael Meacher: holding answer 10 April 2002
	In December 1998, the Department produced a Regulatory Impact Assessment of the EC's proposal for a Regulation which became EC Regulation 2037/2000. This considered two options; either to agree the proposal as it stood, or to argue for modifications to the proposed controls which went beyond the requirements of the Montreal Protocol where these would deliver no real environmental benefit or where the costs of compliance would be disproportionate. As a result of consultation with interested parties, the Government agreed to the proposal in broad terms following changes made during negotiations to some of the proposed controls that in the UK's view were disproportionate.

Ozone Depletion

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent representations her Department has made to other EU Governments regarding the length of period for which use of ozone depleting substances will remain permissible.

Michael Meacher: holding answer 10 April 2002
	My officials meet regularly with counterparts from other EC Member States to discuss issues arising from EC Regulation 2037/2000 on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Together with the European Commission, the UK and other Member States consider possible EC proposals for improving and strengthening the Montreal Protocol. EC Regulation 2037/2000 itself goes considerably further than the Protocol in controlling and phasing out ozone-depleting substances. For example, HCFCs are to be phased out under the Protocol by 2030 and under the Regulation by 2015.

Ozone Depletion

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she proposes to take to promote the use of non-ozone depleting refrigerants which have been developed in the UK.

Michael Meacher: holding answer 10 April 2002
	The key measure is enforcement of EC Regulation 2037/2000 on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer as this puts pressure on producers, suppliers and users of refrigerants to use alternatives to CFCs through the ban on use and supply and HCFCs through use controls on new and existing equipment. The Department with DTI produced the guidance document, "Refrigeration & Air Conditioning—CFC and HCFC Phase Out: Advice on Alternatives and Guidelines for Users". It is available on the DTI's website, www.dti.gov.uk/access/ozone.htm.

Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what criteria have to be met for sites of special scientific interest to be classified as in good condition.

Michael Meacher: SSSIs are notified because of specific biological or geological features, and when those features are being managed in a way which maintains their nature conservation value, they are said to be in favourable condition. Sites are assessed against Common Standards, published by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) which are well established. This publication will be made available to the Library of the House.

Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what measures are being taken to ensure that 95 per cent of all sites of special scientific interest within the UK are brought into good condition by 2010.

Michael Meacher: The target under the Department's public service agreement is that 95 per cent of SSSIs in England, by area, should be in favourable (or unfavourable and improving) condition by 2010. Nature conservation is a devolved matter. Some 60 per cent of sites in England are presently in favourable condition.
	We are addressing the condition of SSSIs on several fronts. English Nature is working with owners and occupiers, advising on management and offering management agreements for positive management of sites. Where necessary, English Nature will also use strong new powers available under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, to tackle the condition of specific sites. With English Nature's advice, we will be looking carefully at the resources necessary to make good progress towards achieving the target.
	We are also working with other Departments and public bodies, who own sites, or whose operations might affect sites, to ensure that their activities further the conservation of these special places.
	Within DEFRA, we are looking at implementation of the Rural White Paper, the recommendations of the Commission on the Future of Farming and Food on sustainable farming and, in the longer term, CAP reform measures with a view to addressing some of the incentives to heavy stocking, which can cause damage, particularly to upland SSSIs.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will publish (a) the base year emissions of the participants in the UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme 2002, (b) their respective targets and (c) the reductions that they are committed to already, as a result of (i) legislation and (ii) public voluntary commitments.

Michael Meacher: holding answer 15 April 2002
	The Government will publish the baseline emissions (average over 1998–2000) for each of the direct participants in the UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme once these have been independently verified by organisations accredited for this specific purpose by the UK Accreditation Service. The respective targets for each direct participant have already been have published on the Department's website. Emission levels required of direct participants through integrated pollution control regulation are already available on the public register. The Department of Trade and Industry's flare consent regime specifies limits on the volume of natural gas flared rather than an emissions level. The 2002 flare consents for British Petroleum plc installations and fields in the Emissions Trading Scheme allow 1,132.55 thousand standard cubic metres of natural gas flared per day. For Shell UK Ltd, the comparable number is 698.17 thousand standard cubic metres of natural gas flared per day. Whilst the Government welcomes any public voluntary commitment made by firms to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, these are a matter for the firms themselves, and not for Government.

Plastics

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what assessment she has made of degradable plastic technology; and what plans she has to promote it;
	(2)  what assessment she has made of (a) the availability and (b) the environmental merits of biodegradable plastic bags; and what plans she has to promote their use.

Michael Meacher: We are aware that a number of companies are marketing degradable plastics technology and products manufactured from these materials. However these new technologies are based on modified plastics manufactured from mineral oil. I realise that there is a range of products and applications, for example in agriculture, where controlled degradability may be of benefit when considering disposal options, but it is not clear that this approach is a sustainable option to the general problem of managing plastics waste.
	The waste strategy for England and Wales, Waste Strategy 2000, emphasises the need to gain more value from waste through re-use, recycling, composting and the recovery of energy. Degradable plastics based on fossil carbon resources, which are specifically designed for disposal with no beneficial recovery potential, run counter to this approach.
	However I do support the development of biodegradable plastics from non-fossil sources. The Government Industry Forum on Non-Food Uses of Crops was set up in March 2001 to provide strategic advice to Government and industry on the development of non-food uses of crops.
	The Forum has examined the UK potential to produce compostable packaging materials from mainstream agricultural crops and has concluded that there is a clear opportunity for both UK agriculture and industry to develop these materials. The Forum is developing a series of recommendations designed to encourage industry to respond and develop to supply an expanding market. These recommendations are likely to be published in the Forum's first Annual Report in the summer of 2002.

Air Quality Strategy

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what progress there has been in improving air quality in deprived areas to meet the objectives and targets prescribed in the Government's Air Quality Strategy; and whether the target the dates set out in the strategy have been met.

Michael Meacher: The Government set out its targets for safeguarding people's health and protecting the environment from air pollution in the Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in January 2000. It includes health-based standards for the eight air pollutants of main concern and objectives for their achievement between 2003 and 2008. Good progress has been made towards achieving most of the targets as a result of the measures put in place by central Government and local authorities. We are, for example, broadly on track to meet our policy objectives for carbon monoxide, benzene, 1,3 butadiene, lead and sulphur dioxide, but more may need to be done in some areas to meet our targets for nitrogen dioxide, particles and ozone.
	Local authorities have a duty to review and assess the local air quality in their area and to designate air quality management areas where it is likely that the air quality objectives will not be met by the relevant deadline. Out of the 88 deprived areas across England, 35 authorities have designated air quality management areas in respect of one or more pollutants. A full list of those authorities that have designated air quality management areas is available at www.aeat.co.uk/netcen/airqual/aqma/home. html
	The majority of the air quality management areas have been designated due to likely exceedences of the NO 2 and PM 1 0 objectives relating to pollution from traffic. These authorities have a duty to draw up an air quality action plan setting out those measures they intend to take in pursuit of the air quality objectives. They will also have to work closely with other local stakeholders, such as the Highways Agency, Environment Agency and local businesses, in order to deliver improvements in local air quality. The Government will continue to oversee this process to ensure that the objectives are met as far as possible in all parts of the country, including the most deprived areas, by the relevant target dates.

Risk Assessment

Patrick McLoughlin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action the Government are taking to ensure that scientific risk assessments are carried out before EU legislation is introduced banning or restricting the use of well established chemicals or metals that in her view are used safely and responsibly; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The main route to EU based restrictions on well-established chemicals is through the European Community's Existing Substances Regulation (793/93/EEC). The Regulation requires that risk assessments are prepared before proposals for restrictions or bans can be considered. The UK plays an active role in the operation of the Regulation, including carrying out a number of the assessments. Should unacceptable uses be identified by the risk assessment, the Member State Rapporteur will prepare a risk reduction strategy. This will include an analysis of the advantages and drawbacks of potential risk reduction measures and lead to a recommendation in the Official Journal for further Community action as appropriate. A small number of chemicals are also subject to restrictions through discussions arising from Member State notifications under the Technical Standards Directive 98/34/EC, concerns identified by the European Commission's scientific committees or other international programmes. Whenever these are debated the UK presses for an appropriate risk assessment to be carried out.

Endangered Species

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what checks are made on illegal imports of products made from endangered species; what plans she has to extend the ban on the import of products made from endangered species; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: holding answer 16 April 2002
	The United Kingdom is a Party to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which controls and monitors international trade in endangered species and products derived from them.
	CITES is implemented within the EU by Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 939/97.
	HM Customs and Excise enforce the controls imposed by these Regulations, targeting their checks on the importation of items covered by the legislation on the basis of assessed risk, or as a direct result of intelligence received (including advice from my Department). Any offences detected would result in seizure of the goods concerned and may result in the prosecution of the individuals or company involved where appropriate.
	CITES does not ban trade in all endangered species. Over 30,000 animals and plants are currently listed in the three Appendices to CITES, of which only around 800 are listed in Appendix I, effectively banning them and their derivatives from trade except under exceptional circumstances. We have no plans to seek to include more species in Appendix I.

Genetically Modified Organisms

Joan Ruddock: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will support the labelling of animal feeds containing or derived from genetically modified organisms in the forthcoming European negotiations on traceability and labelling.

Michael Meacher: The Government supports the labelling of feed that consists of, or contains, genetically modified organisms (GMOs). However, enforcement of a requirement to label feed derived from GMOs which does not contain GM material at detectable levels would be at present extremely difficult, because it is impossible to test such feed to distinguish it from its non-GM counterpart, and hence not practical to apply appropriate validation and enforcement measures.

Hazardous Waste

Jonathan Sayeed: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps her Department is taking to ensure that the United Kingdom will be able to reduce discharges of hazardous substances into water supplies to the levels required by the EU Water Framework Directive.

Michael Meacher: So far as UK drinking water supplies are concerned, standards are laid down in the EC Drinking Water Directive and enforced through UK Drinking Water Regulations. Water is treated as necessary by the water companes to meet these standards. The Water Framework Directive does not set standards for drinking water.
	As for the aquatic environment, discharges of dangerous substances are controlled under the existing EC Dangerous Substances Directive and parallel regulations in the UK. These will be superseded in due course under the provisions of the Water Framework Directive. Standards for "priority" dangerous substances will be set in new Water Framework Directive "daughter" directives due to be proposed by the end of 2003.

Correspondence

Anthony Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she will reply to the letters of 10 and 14 January from the hon. Member for Totnes about the (a) Totnes and District Show and (b) Kingsbridge Show regarding the range of measures put in place by her Department since the foot and mouth outbreak; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: holding reply 19 March 2002
	A reply was sent on 19 March covering both letters. I am sorry that the honourable member's Parliamentary Question was not answered as soon as the letter was sent.

Correspondence

Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she will reply to the hon. Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham's letters dated 30 January, 12 February and 14 March and the letters from the Shrewsbury Chronicle dated 11 January, 15 March and 22 March concerning the Bale Us Out campaign sent to the Secretary of State for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.

Elliot Morley: We have been unable to trace copies of the correspondence referred to.

Recycling

Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she is taking to encourage the recycling of (a) waste plastic and (b) waste silage film from farms.

Michael Meacher: Waste plastic packaging, of which some 1.7 million tonnes is expected to arise in the UK waste stream this year, is one of the materials covered by the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 (as amended). Since the introduction of these Regulations in 1997, and in particular the recovery and recycling targets for packaging waste which took effect in 1998, the amount of plastic packaging waste recycled has risen from 7 per cent in 1998 to 12 per cent at the end of 2000. Final outturn figures for 2001 are not yet available, but we expect this to have risen to around 15 per cent last year.
	We will be addressing the question of how to deal with waste non-packaging farm plastics, including waste silage film from farms, in the forthcoming consultation document on agricultural waste. We will consider whether a statutory scheme should be introduced in the light of responses to this consultation exercise.

EDUCATION AND SKILLS

Press Officers

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many press officers there were in her Department on (a) 1 May 1997 and (b) the latest available date.

Ivan Lewis: holding reply 10 April
	The average number of staff within the Department for Education and Employment/Department for Education and Skills Press Office for 1997 and 2002 are:
	
		
			 Year Press Office Total 
		
		
			 1997–1998 20.5 
			 2001–2002* 23.0 
		
	
	*Excludes five members of staff transferred to the Department for Work and Pensions as part of the Machinery of Government changes following the general election.

Graduate Earnings

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will make a statement on the average level of graduate earnings, broken down by social class.

Margaret Hodge: holding reply 17 April
	The table below shows the estimated average gross weekly earnings of graduates with a first degree and in full-time employment. The figures include all graduates who are currently in the labour market and employed full-time, irrespective of age and how long ago they graduated.
	
		
			 Current socio-economic classification Average gross weekly earnings of graduates in full-time employment 
		
		
			 Higher managerial and professional £730 
			 Lower managerial and professional £520 
			 Intermediate occupations £310 
			 Lower supervisory and technical £410 
			 Semi-routine occupations £270 
			 Routine occupations £240 
			 Never worked, unemployed and not 
			 elsewhere classified £230 
			 All £570 
		
	
	Source:
	Labour Force Survey, Autumn 2001.

Business Development Unit

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many civil servants are employed in the Business Development Unit in her Department; what the Unit's annual budget is; and if she will make a statement on the Unit's activities.

Stephen Timms: The Business Development Unit operates under contract to my Department and is staffed mainly by non-civil-servants, but currently includes one civil servant on secondment from the Department. Its budget for 2002–03 is £482,278. The Unit's role is to manage and develop relationships with appropriate key business partners, promoting their understanding of and responses to our educational policies, and securing sponsorship and other support for specific national projects particularly for the schools sector.

Parliamentary Questions

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  how many staff were involved in each of the last three years in preparing draft answers to written parliamentary questions;
	(2)  what the cost was to her Department of answering written parliamentary questions in 2001; and how that cost was calculated.

Ivan Lewis: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 17 April, Official Report, column 929W by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House of Commons. Since the election the hon. Member has tabled 225 questions to this Department.

Advertising

Alex Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the cost was of media advertising in each of the past five parliamentary Sessions including the current session, for her Department in (a) England, (b) Wales and (c) Northern Ireland; and for the last two parliamentary Sessions and the current parliamentary Session, what the media advertising expenditure was per month in (i) England, (ii) Wales and (iii) Northern Ireland.

Ivan Lewis: The Department does not target Wales and Northern Ireland with its advertising. This means that regional media outside England is not used for Departmental advertising. However, our campaigns do unavoidably receive some coverage in Wales and Northern Ireland through the use of national newspapers, satellite television and other national media which reaches outside England.
	It is not possible to provide the information as requested by Parliamentary session, or by month, except at disproportionate cost. The figures by financial year are as follows:
	
		
			  £000 
		
		
			 1997–98 9,992 
			 1998–99 15,673 
			 1999–00 11,900 
			 2000–01 29,066 
			 2001–02 (to date) 17,665

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Departmental Events

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her answer of 26 March, Official Report, column 795W, on departmental events, how many such events have taken place on departmental premises in each of the last four years; and at what cost to public funds.

Patricia Hewitt: No central records are kept that would enable the information to be supplied, and it could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

Publicity Expenditure

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her answer of 26 March 2002, Official Report, column 793W, on publicity expenditure, how much money her Department has spent on advertising since May 1997.

Patricia Hewitt: DTI spending on advertising through the Central Office of Information from 1 April 1997 to 31 March 2002 has been £29,614,332.

Bankruptcy

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the percentage change was in the unit cost of administering bankruptcy and compulsory liquidation in December 2002 by comparison with (a) December 2000 and (b) December 1999.

Melanie Johnson: holding answer 10 April 2002
	The unit cost of case administration in December 2001 had (a) increased by 2.7 per cent in comparison with December 2000 and (b) increased by 2.6 per cent in comparison with December 1999. The increase was principally the result of the cost of IT investment and change.

National Australia Bank

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make representations on behalf of Clydesdale Bank employees and other UK staff whose jobs are under threat from plans by National Australia Bank to cut its European workforce; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Johnson: Whilst job losses are always of great concern, this is a commercial matter for the firm concerned and I have no plans to make representations.

Biotechnological Co-operation (Israel)

Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the objectives are of the Britech programme of biotechnological co-operation with Israel; how many (a) British and (b) Israeli companies are involved; what the cost is of the programme; and what monitoring is undertaken to ensure that companies and individuals located in the illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza are not involved.

Patricia Hewitt: The Britain-Israel Technology Fund "Britech" was established by an intergovernmental Agreement between the UK and Israel in May 1999 and each country is contributing £7.75 million over five years. The objectives are to encourage and support alliances between private sector businesses in the UK and Israel, for joint industrial research and development and subsequent joint management and marketing of new products. To date, 12 projects, each involving one UK and one Israeli company have been approved and £4.74 million have been committed. Of these, 4 projects are in the area of biotechnology and £1.71 million have been committed. Project proposals are presented to the Britech Board for approval and details of the location of the participants are included. The Britech Chief Executive advises the Board of potentially sensitive projects. No projects are located in settlements in the West Bank or Gaza.

Assisted Areas

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the rates averaged over the three years used for the purpose of formulating the assisted areas map were for (a) the Isle of Wight, (b) the Isle of Thanet, (c) England and (d) the United Kingdom of (i) employment, (ii) residence-based unemployment, (iii) workforce-based unemployment and (iv) manufacturing employment share; and what the standard deviation was for each of the purposes of the European Commission's regional aid guidelines.

Alan Johnson: holding answer 18 April 2002
	The following figures were calculated for the purposes of the regional aid guidelines:
	
		Per cent. 
		
			  Estimate of employment rate Estimate of residential unemployment Estimate of workforce unemployment Manufacturing employment share 
		
		
			 Isle of Wight 69.4 10.2 10.4 17.4 
			 Thanet, Sandwich and Worth 72.8 10.7 12.5 20.0 
			 Great Britain 73.6 7.7 6.9 18.3 
			 Great Britain excluding Article 87(3)(a) areas 74.2 7.6 6.6 18.1 
			 Standard deviation 6.0 2.6 2.6 8.2 
		
	
	These numbers are not National Statistics, though they were derived from National Statistics sources. The calculations for Thanet also included Sandwich and Worth wards in Dover, and total figures were calculated for Great Britain rather than for England or the United Kingdom.

Supermarket Competition

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will investigate the competition implications of supermarkets' refusal to accept meat from UK-registered low throughput abbatoirs.

Melanie Johnson: Product sourcing decisions are normally a commercial matter for the company concerned. However, if these do raise competition concerns, they should be put to the Director General of Fair Trading, who is responsible for investigating complaints about anti-competitive behaviour.

Food Safety (Toys)

Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will set up a joint working group of her Department and the Food Standards Agency to undertake a risk assessment of toys embedded in foodstuff items.

Melanie Johnson: I have no plans to do so. Research commissioned by my Department provided no evidence to suggest that toys marketed with foodstuffs pose a greater risk to children than other small toys. The European Commission has also looked at this issue and reached the same conclusion.

Food Safety (Toys)

Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what measures she has taken to encourage retailers to make an assessment of the risk of toys embedded in foodstuff items.

Melanie Johnson: It is for suppliers—manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers—to take appropriate measures, within the limits of their activities, to ensure that the products they supply to consumers are safe. Risk assessments are generally carried out by the manufacturer of the final product.
	All toys supplied in the UK must satisfy the essential safety requirements of the Toys (Safety) Regulations 1995 which implement the European Directive on the safety of toys. The Directive is under review and we will give careful consideration to any proposals put forward regarding toys supplied with foodstuffs and warning labels.

Business Mergers

Nigel Waterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what changes to UK law she is considering following the merger between P&O Princess and Royal Caribbean Cruises.

Melanie Johnson: This is a proposed merger which is presently being considered under the merger provisions of the Fair Trading Act 1973. Further comment would not be appropriate at this stage.

Postal Services

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions have taken place with the Dutch Postal Service about the future of Consignia; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: holding answer 10 April 2002
	Consignia took part in discussions about a possible merger of Consignia's postal activities with the Dutch Postal Service (TPG). However, no satisfactory agreement was reached and Ministers therefore agreed with the company that discussions should cease. It has been the policy of successive Governments not to go into the detail of such commercially confidential matters.
	Since the government has given Consignia commercial freedom, within the public sector, it is entirely appropriate that Consignia has been considering its commercial strategy, including the possibility of relationships or ventures with other operators.

Chemical Industry

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what her policy is towards the proposals contained in the EC White Paper, Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The UK Government supports the aims and objectives of the EU Chemicals Strategy. We wish to see a workable strategy that protects the environment and human health by targeting chemicals of most concern through the authorisation process while at the same time minimising animal testing, encouraging innovation and maintaining the competitiveness of the chemicals industry. We support the addition to the authorisation process of chemicals that are at the same time persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBTs) and that are very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB), once the necessary criteria for identification of PBTs and vPvBs are established; and also the inclusion of known endocrine disruptors when agreed scientifically valid test methods and criteria are established to identify these substances.

Chemical Industry

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment she has made of the impact on the UK chemicals industry of the EC White Paper, Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy.

Patricia Hewitt: The White Paper estimates that testing costs to industry in the EU would be 2.1 billion euros over 11 years and that 190 extra staff will be needed at the European Chemicals Bureau. No extra costs are envisaged for regulatory authorities and the Commission argues that a saving in industry human resources can be expected. An initial Regulatory Impact Assessment carried out on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs suggests that the costs to the UK might be in the order of £760 million (about 1.2 billion euros). The consultants Risk and Policy Analysists Limited are currently carrying out a Business Impact Assessment on behalf of the Commission for the whole of the EU. This report is due to be published next month.

Chemical Industry

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the terms of reference are for the Chemical Innovation and Growth Team; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The terms of reference for the Chemicals Innovation and Growth Team are that it will evaluate the key factors that will impact on the chemicals industry globally and identify the opportunities and challenges for the UK; formulate a vision of what the future chemicals industry might look like and how to get there; and make recommendations to industry, Government and others for specific actions.
	The Chemicals Innovation and Growth Team consists of representatives from the chemicals industry and other key stakeholders and is chaired by Byron Grote of BP Chemicals. It is focusing on four major areas: innovation; regulation and reputation; customers and markets; and skills and competences. It will report later this year.

Data Protection Act

Mark Lazarowicz: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps she is taking to control the activities of businesses which represent themselves as public agencies enforcing the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Michael Wills: I refer the hon Member to my replies to the hon. Member for Batley and Spen (Mr. Wood) of 5 February 2002, Official Report, columns 906–907W; and the hon Member for Weston-super-Mare (Mr. Cotter) of 5 March 2002, Official Report, column 196W.

WALES

Consultants

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many contracts the Wales Office has with consultants; what level of professional indemnity insurance is standard in contracts with small consultants; whether he can make exceptions to the level of professional indemnity insurance; and what recent discussions he has had with other Government departments about the level of professional indemnity insurance.

Mr. Murphy: holding answer 18 April 2002
	My Department currently has one contract. There is no standard level of insurance required, it would depend on the nature and purpose of the contract.

Delegated Legislation

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment he has made of the cost-effectiveness of the Environment Act 1995 (Commencement No. 20 and Saving Provision) (Wales) Order 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Murphy: The essential purpose of the Order was to bring into force, in Wales, the provisions of the Environment Act 1995 relating to the remediation of contaminated land. As such, and having regard to information I received from the National Assembly for Wales, I was satisfied that it raised no untoward financial implications.
	The detailed implementation of these provisions is a matter for the National Assembly.

Delegated Legislation

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment he has made of the cost-effectiveness of the Artificial Insemination of Cattle (Emergency Licences) (Wales) Regulations 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Murphy: That is a matter for the National Assembly for Wales.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

General Affairs Council

Jimmy Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the outcome was of the General Affairs Council held in Brussels on 15 to 16 April; what the Government's stance was on the issues discussed, including its voting record; and if he will make a statement.

Peter Hain: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs represented the UK at the General Affairs Council (GAC) in Luxembourg on 15 April. The Council adopted the "A" points listed in document 7057/02. It also noted the resolutions, decisions and opinions adopted by the European Parliament listed in the documents 7059/02, 7060/02 and 7061/02. Copies of these documents will be placed in the Library of the House. No formal votes were taken. Council Conclusions were adopted by consensus. Work in other Council formations The Council noted recent developments in the Transport, Telecommunications and Agriculture Councils. Enlargement The Council welcomed progress made in the accession negotiations. It underlined the importance of establishing EU Common Positions on the remaining chapters in order to keep to the timetable for conclusion of the negotiations. Staff regulations Commission Vice-President Kinnock outlined progress on EU institutional personnel policy reform and reminded the Council of the reform objectives: to introduce a more streamlined career structure, modernise pay and pension systems, and to safeguard ethical and professional standards.
	The Council supported the Commission's aims to make its personnel policy more efficient, transparent, accountable and meritocratic and congratulated the Commission on work done so far. EU Action Plan on the fight against terrorism The Presidency briefed Partners on progress in implementation of the EU Action Plan. In particular, it focussed on implementation of UNSCR 1373, improving links between police and the judiciary in Member States (including Europol and Eurojust) and co-operation with third countries. Illegal immigration The Council discussed methods of combating illegal immigration including policing sea borders more effectively. This followed presentations by Italy and the Commission. The Council stressed the need for close, effective co-operation with countries of origin. Conclusions on these lines were adopted. It was agreed that the EU should strive to improve the speed and effectiveness of its actions and should implement the measures outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, adopted in February 2002, by harnessing all external relations instruments available in addition to those provided by the immigration policy framework. The Council welcomed the Commission's proposal to convene a high level meeting to address these issues. It highlighted the gravity of the situation, and the human rights violations which resulted from illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings. Wider Europe: relations between the future enlarged EU and its Eastern neighbours At the Presidency's invitation I outlined the case for the EU to consider how it could make more effective its relations with the EU's post-enlargement eastern neighbours, Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova. The need for further thinking on this was widely endorsed. The Commission agreed to come forward with a Communication, in co-operation with the High Representative. The Council welcomed Commission and High Representative plans to contribute to the debate on strengthening relations during the second half of 2002. India/ Pakistan At UK request, the Council discussed the continuing India-Pakistan tensions and expressed concern at sectarian violence in Gujarat. It welcomed the prospect of early visits to the region by the High Representative, Javier Solana, and Commissioner Patten. EU/ Switzerland relations The Council welcomed the Commission's adoption of draft positions on the outstanding negotiating mandates for sectoral agreements between the EU and Switzerland and called for them to be finalised as swiftly as possible. The Council urged the Swiss authorities to make progress quickly in negotiations on combating fraud and called on the Presidency and Commission to pursue these aims also at senior levels. European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) The Council reaffirmed its commitment to overcoming outstanding issues on EU-NATO co-operation, including "Berlin-plus". It also debated the possibility of a future EU operation in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Middle East Ministers discussed at length the latest diplomatic efforts to achieve a cease-fire and withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian-controlled areas. Ministers reiterated their support for the US Secretary of State's mission to the region. Western Balkans Commissioner Patten presented the first annual report on the Stabilisation and Association Process for South East Europe.
	The Council adopted Conclusions welcoming the Commission's presentation of this work and covering the countries of the region. In particular, the Council was encouraged by the willingness of the Serbian and Montenegran parliaments to restructure their bilateral relations and to draft a new constitutional charter by June this year. The EU offered its assistance to aid these objectives. The Council welcomed progress toward concluding a Stabilisation and Association Agreement, but noted that continuing co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) remained crucial to Serbia and Montenegro's EU aspirations. Bosnia and Herzegovina The Council welcomed agreement reached by Bosnia and Herzegovina political leaders on the Constitutional Court decision on constituent peoples and called for urgent adoption of the amendments in full compliance with the agreement.
	The Council also requested full and prompt compliance by the Bosnian authorities with the remaining elements of the road map, in the context of the Stabilisation and Association Process. It also asked authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina to co-operate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal. Right of return The Council requested governments across the region to step up efforts to allow for the return of displaced persons. EU relations with Central American and Andean community countries The Council agreed with the Commission's intention to submit a proposal for negotiating directives, aimed at deepening the bilateral relationships between the EU and these regions through the conclusion of political dialogue and co-operation agreements. Euro-Mediterranean Partnership The Council endorsed the Presidency's proposals for EU positions for the Valencia Euro-Mediterranean conference of 22–23 April. Afghanistan Ministers met Afghan Foreign Minister, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah briefly at the GAC.
	The Council reiterated that international assistance to Afghanistan should be based on territorial integrity and be conditional on implementation of the Bonn agreement objectives (peace, representational governance, elimination of terrorism and of drug production/ trafficking). The EU emphasised the necessity of conducting the Emergency Loya Jirga selection process in political neutrality. Zimbabwe The Council expressed deep concern at reports of continuing state-sanctioned violence against opposition supporters and condemned continuing widespread human rights abuse.
	The Council agreed to impose a moratorium on bilateral ministerial level contacts with Zimbabwe until further notice, exempting political dialogue intended to promote democracy, human rights and the rule of law. It awaits with interest the report from the Troika visit to the SADC region and signs of a clear commitment by the Government of Zimbabwe to ending political violence, respecting basic democratic norms, and engaging quickly and constructively in efforts at national reconciliation.

Zimbabwe

James Purnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if Zimbabwe was discussed during the EU General Affairs Council on 15 April.

Jack Straw: On 15 April, the EU General Affairs Council imposed a moratorium on bilateral ministerial level contacts with Zimbabwe until further notice, except for the conduct of political dialogue intended to promote democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in Zimbabwe, and on issues relating to regional security or for addressing humanitarian needs. The Council decided to defer consideration of additional targeted measures against the Government of Zimbabwe until its next meeting in May. An EU Troika will visit Southern Africa soon, to discuss the situation in Zimbabwe with SADC countries (not Zimbabwe itself).
	We have made clear that the people of Zimbabwe have been denied their fundamental right to choose by whom they are governed. We support efforts by South Africa and Nigeria to facilitate dialogue between ZANU(PF) and MDC, to try to restore democracy and the rule of law in Zimbabwe. We remain in continuous contact with our EU, US, Commonwealth and SADC partners.

SOLICITOR-GENERAL

Ministerial Private Offices

John Bercow: To ask the Solicitor-General what the running costs were of (a) her Ministers' private offices, separately identifying expenditure on staff and (b) her Department in each year from May 1997 to the nearest date for which the information is available.

Harriet Harman: Of the Departments for which the Attorney General is responsible, only my own Department, the Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers, has a small private office of four staff which serves both the Attorney General and me. The cost of running the private office cannot be separated from the cost of running the Department as a whole and so the figures provided below relate only to part (b) of the question. The figures provided below include staff costs.
	
		Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 1997–98 2,477,000 
			 1998–99 2,292,000 
			 1999–00 2,150,000 
			 2000–01 2,327,000 
		
	
	Treasury Solicitor's Department
	(including Government Property Lawyers)
	
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 1997–98 23,751,000 
			 1998–99 25,016,000 
			 1999–00 29,160,000 
			 2000–01 27,989,000 
		
	
	Crown Prosecution Service
	
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 1997–98 368,018,000 
			 1998–99 368,411,000 
			 1999–00 381,683,000 
			 2000–01 406,864,000 
		
	
	Serious Fraud Office
	
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 1997–98 9,301,000 
			 1998–99 10,685,000 
			 1999–00 11,223,000 
			 2000–01 12,159,000

Sex Abuse Investigations

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Solicitor-General how many (a) complaints and (b) items of correspondence have been received by (a) the Attorney General, (b) the Solicitor-General and (c) the Crown Prosecution Service in relation to historical sex abuse investigations in the United Kingdom in (i) 1999, (ii) 2000 and (iii) 2001.

Harriet Harman: Correspondence and complaints sent to the Law Officers are recorded primarily by the name of the sender. They are not categorised by recipient nor by subject in the manner set out in the question. The CPS has no central records of complaints or correspondence. The information requested could only be obtained by examining all correspondence received since 1998. This would incur disproportionate costs.

Departmental Report

John Bercow: To ask the Solicitor-General when the 2002 Departmental report will be published.

Harriet Harman: holding reply 17 April 2002
	The 2002 Departmental Reports will be published by 31 May 2002.

Mobile Phones

John Bercow: To ask the Solicitor-General, pursuant to her answer of 11 February, Official Report, column 1112W, on mobile phones, how many staff of the Crown Prosecution Service were provided with mobile telephones and other associated equipment in (a) 1998–99, (b) 1999–2000, (c) 2000–01 and (d) 2001–02.

Harriet Harman: holding answer 18 April 2002
	The Crown Prosecution Service provided the following numbers of mobile phones with associated equipment in 1998–9, and subsequent financial years.
	
		
			  Phones In Circulation Throughout Year 
		
		
			 1998–1999 131 
			 1999–2000 336 
			 2000–2001 404 
			 2001–2002 507

Special Advisers

Simon Burns: To ask the Solicitor-General how many special advisers there were in her Department; and what their salaries were in each of the last five years.

Harriet Harman: holding answer 9 April 2002
	None of the departments for which the Attorney General is responsible employ special advisers or have done so in the last five years.

TREASURY

Taxation

Norman Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many (a) audits and (b) investigations have been conducted by the Inland Revenue of taxpayers with a gross annual income of (a) £15,000 or less, (b) £15,001 to £25,000, (c) £25,001 to £50,000, (d) £50,001 to £100,000, (e) £100,001 to £200,000, (f) £200,001 to £500,000, (g) £500,001 to £1,000,000 and (h) more than £1,000,000, for the most recent available accounting period.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 15 April 2002
	The Inland Revenue does not have figures analysed in this way. The Board of Inland Revenue publishes the results of its work tackling non-compliance in its annual report, which is available in the Library. The latest figures are in Appendix 2 and cover the year to 31 March 2001.

Taxation

Norman Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the estimated annual total cost of non-compliance with Inland Revenue laws and rules in each of the last five years.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 15 April 2002
	There is no reliable measure of the total income tax and national insurance contributions lost to evasion. In his report, published in March 2000, Lord Grabiner QC commented on the scale of the hidden economy and said:
	"By its nature, the size of the informal economy is hard to measure. Most estimates are based on analysing high-level economic aggregates, such as labour market statistics or income and expenditure surveys, and calculate the result as a percentage of GDP. However there is research which suggests that these estimates tend to be exaggerated."
	"It would be impractical to arrive at a precise and meaningful figure as to the scale of the problem without a considerable investment of time and resources."

LORD CHANCELLOR

Royal Family

Norman Baker: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what his duties are in relation to Royal issues.

Michael Wills: None of the Parliamentary Secretaries in the Lord Chancellor's Department has delegated responsibility for Royal matters.

Energy Costs

John Bercow: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement on energy costs incurred by his Department in each of the last 10 years.

Michael Wills: I apologise for the delay in answering this question. I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Rural Affairs on 19 March 2002, Official Report, column 268W.

PFI/PPPs

John Bercow: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department 
	(1)  what the difference was between the price offered in reaching preferred bidder stage and the final contract price for the five largest PFI contracts let by his Department in each of the last four years; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what the difference was between the price offered in reaching preferred bidder stage and the final contract price for PPP contracts let by his Department in each of the last four years; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Wills: The only private finance initiative (PFI) or public private partnership contract signed by this Department in the last four years to have gone through a preferred bidder stage was the PFI contract for the Probate Records Centre. There was no change in contract value between the preferred bidder stage and contract signature in July 1999. PFI contracts for magistrates' courts have not been included in this reply because they are let by local authorities.

Public Service Agreements

John Bercow: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will list the public service agreement targets which have been revised and those which have been introduced since the publication of the 2001 departmental report.

Michael Wills: The 2001 departmental report provides details of progress against Public Service Agreement targets developed under the Comprehensive Spending Review 1998 and lists the published Public Service Agreement targets for Spending Review 2000. From 1 April 2001 the Spending Review 2000 Public Service Agreement, which covers the work of the Lord Chancellor's Department until March 2004, replaced the Comprehensive Spending Review targets.
	Since the publication of the 2001 departmental report, no further Public Service Agreement targets have been introduced. In the first year of Spending Review 2000, one Public Service Agreement target has been updated (WA 349, 8 May 2001).

WORK AND PENSIONS

Child Support Agency

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to seek compensation from the Affinity Consortium for the delay to the Child Support Reforms New Rules Implementation IT project.

Malcolm Wicks: holding answer 26 March 2002
	The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Steve Webb, dated 18 April 2002
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in replying to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency promised a substantive reply by me.
	You ask what plans the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has to seek compensation from the Affinity Consortium for the delay to the Child Support Reforms New Rules Implementation IT project.
	We will take stock of the position when testing is complete and we are able to recommend to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions a revised commencement date for the next phase of Child Support Reforms.

Child Support Agency

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many CSA cases have been referred to the Parliamentary Ombudsman in each year since the creation of the agency from (a) the Angus constituency, (b) Scotland and (c) the UK.

Malcolm Wicks: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Michael Weir, dated 18 April 2002
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in replying to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency promised a substantive reply by me.
	You have asked how many CSA cases have been referred to the Parliamentary Ombudsman in each year since the creation of the Agency from (a) the Angus Constituency, (b) Scotland and (c) the UK.
	The Table on the attached annex provides this information.
	The Parliamentary Ombudsman started recording CSA details late 1995. As details are validated on completion of the cases, due to the backlogs at that time, the first year the Office was confident of accurate figures was 1997 when Agency details were first published in its Annual Report. Therefore figures listed prior to 1997 should be viewed as incomplete records of those years.
	I hope this is helpful.
	
		Annex 1 Number of CSA cases referred to Parliamentary Ombudsman
		
			 Year Angus (Constituency cases) Scotland cases Total UK Cases 
		
		
			 1993–1994 0 1 7 
			 1994–1995 1 8 88 
			 1995–1996 0 34 118 
			 1996–1997 1 28 102 
			 1997–1998 1 14 67 
			 1998–1999 1 11 51 
			 1999–2000 1 19 102 
			 2000–2001 0 17 76 
		
	
	Source:
	Parliamentary Ombudsman's Office and the Child Support Agency's
	Parliamentary Ombudsman Office Focal Point.

Child Support Agency

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people are registered with the Child Support Agency; how many people registered in (a) January and (b) February; and how many are forecast to register in April.

Malcolm Wicks: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Nigel Evans, dated 18 April 2002
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in replying to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child support Agency promised a substantive reply by me.
	You ask how many people are registered with the Child support agency; how many people registered in (a) January and (b) February; and how many are forecast to register in April.
	The live and assessed caseload for the Agency up to February 2002 was 1,077,800 cases. The number of parents with care who made an application for a maintenance assessment to the Agency in January and February 2002 was 34,086 and 29,681 respectively.
	We forecast that a further 30,000 parents with care will make an application to the Agency in April 2002.
	I hope this is helpful.

Child Support Agency

Mark Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether the new CSA computer system was subject to OGC Gateway reviews.

Malcolm Wicks: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Mark Todd, dated 18 April 2002
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in replying to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency promised a substantive reply by me.
	You ask whether the new CSA computer system was subject to OGC Gateway reviews.
	The development of the CSA computer system is part of a broader programme to implement the Child Support Reform programme. Two OGC Gateway reviews of that programme have taken place. The first was from the 23 to 27 April 2001 and the second was from the 22 to 25 January 2002.
	I hope this is helpful.

Child Support Agency

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many departures from Child Support Agency assessments have been (a) applied for and (b) approved in each year since the scheme's inception.

Malcolm Wicks: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Andrew Turner, dated 18 April 2002
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in replying to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency promised a substantive reply by me.
	You ask, how many departures from Child Support Agency assessments have been (a) applied for and (b) approved in each year since the scheme's inception.
	The table set out below shows the number of Departure applications and awards from the inception of the Departures scheme in December 1996.
	Figures are for year ending March unless otherwise specified.
	
		
			 Year ending December 1996 to March 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 April 2001 to February 2002 Total 
		
		
			 Departure Applied for 3,648 21,918 14,889 14,853 17,100 11,840 84,248 
			 Departure Awarded 114 2,360 3,162 6,393 7,049 6,116 25,194 
		
	
	Source:
	CSA Performance Management Team
	Since April 2000 the Agency has been recording figures of departure applications through the computer system. Figures prior to April 2000 were recorded manually and may be less accurate.
	I hope this is helpful.

Child Support Agency

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents without care have failed to pay the necessary maintenance to parents with care for (a) six to 12 weeks, (b) 12 to 26 weeks and (c) more than 26 weeks in each year since the creation of the Child Support Agency; and what proportion they represent of all parents against whom maintenance orders are kept.

Malcolm Wicks: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Andrew Turner, dated 18 April 2002
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in replying to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency promised a substantive reply by me.
	You ask, how many parents without care have failed to pay the necessary maintenance to parents with care for (a) six to 12 weeks (b) 12 to 26 weeks and (c) more than 26 weeks in each year since the creation of the Child Support Agency; and what proportion they represent of all parents against whom maintenance orders are kept.
	I am sorry but information is not available in the format you have requested.
	The table set out below shows the numbers of full, partial and non compliant non-resident parents for each year end (March). I am unable to supply the same information for earlier years as we did not gather information in that way.
	
		Non-Resident Parent Case Compliance
		
			  2000 2001 2002 
		
		
			 Full Compliance 165,820 (49.3%) 185,900 (52.9%) 211,000 (60.9%) 
			 Partial Compliance 56,340 (16.7%) 52,060 (14.8%) 30,600 (8.8%) 
			 Nil Compliance 114,500 (34%) 113,720 (32.3%) 104,800 (30.3%) 
		
	
	Source:
	CSA Performance Management Team
	I hope this is helpful.

Child Support Agency

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the (a) planned cost was and (b) current estimated cost is of the Child Support. Reforms New Rules Implementation IT project.

Malcolm Wicks: holding reply 26 March 2002
	The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Steve Webb, dated 18 April 2002
	The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in replying to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency promised a substantive reply by me.
	You ask what the (a) planned cost was and (b) current estimated cost is of the Child Support Reforms New Rules Implementation IT project and
	The planned total cost of the project to implement Child Support Reform over the 10 year period of the business case was £651 million.
	I am sorry that I cannot provide the planned and current estimated cost of the IT component as it is commercially confidential. As this is a PFI contract and subject to performance criteria the amount of payment will be affected by the level of performance achieved.
	I am sorry I cannot be more helpful.

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

ITV Digital

John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a statement on the implications for future broadcasting rights contracts of ITV Digital's stated inability to meet the terms of its agreement with the Football League.

Peter Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a statement on the implications for future broadcasting rights contracts of ITV Digital's stated inability to meet the terms of its agreement with the Football League.

Kim Howells: Subject to the requirements of the 1996 Broadcasting Act, relating to "listed events", contracts for the broadcasting rights to sports events are matters for commercial negotiations between the rightsholders and the broadcasters concerned.

ITV Digital

John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what meetings she has had with representatives of (a) Granada plc and (b) Carlton Communications plc since ITV Digital's entry into administration;

Siobhain McDonagh: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what representations she has received from the Chairmen and chief executives of (a) Granada plc and (b) Carlton Communications plc since 27 March.

Peter Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what discussions she has had with representatives of Granada plc and Carlton Communications plc since ITV Digital went into administration.

Kim Howells: Over the past weeks I have been kept closely in touch by all sides involved in the ITV Digital negotiations. However the decisions taken by ITV Digital are commercial decisions for them, and them alone, to take.

Professional Indemnity Insurance

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many contracts her Department has with consultants; what level of professional indemnity insurance is standard in contracts with small consultants; whether she can make exceptions to the level of professional indemnity insurance; and what recent discussions she has had with other Government departments about the level of professional indemnity insurance.

Kim Howells: holding answer 18 April 2002
	The DCMS does not maintain a register of contracts under £5,000 in value. Over that value there are fifteen current contracts in which contract conditions stipulate "that policies of insurance should be effected and maintained providing an adequate level of cover in respect of all risks". To date there have been no discussions with other Government Departments concerning levels of professional indemnity insurance.

Religious Broadcasting

David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport by what criteria she will assess the continuing need for the statutory ban on Christian broadcasters holding different categories of broadcasting licence when reaching a conclusion on these issues prior to the publication of the Communications Bill.

Kim Howells: In considering whether to restrict religious bodies holding broadcasting licences, the Government takes into account, amongst other things, the need to promote the efficient use of scarce resources in order to safeguard pluralism, cater for a variety of tastes and interests and avoid discrimination between the many different religions practised in the United Kingdom.

Television Licences

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will list the circumstances under which a television licensing officer can enter a private dwelling.

Kim Howells: holding answer 18 April 2002
	TV Licensing officials may enter a private dwelling only with the consent of the occupier or if authorised to do so by a warrant issued by a magistrate. Under section 15(1) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949 (as amended), a magistrate may issue such a warrant if satisfied, by information provided on oath, that there is reasonable ground for suspecting that an offence under the Act has been or is being committed.

Television Licences

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will list the circumstances in which the owner of a television in the United Kingdom (a) does not and (b) does require a television licence.

Kim Howells: holding answer 18 April 2002
	A television licence is required to instal or use television receiving apparatus to receive television programme services, as defined by section 2(4) of the Broadcasting Act 1990. The BBC, as Licensing Authority, has responsibility for determining television licensing requirements in individual cases, subject to the ultimate authority of the courts.

Private Finance Initiative

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many private finance initiative projects have been subject to refinancing after the contracts have been signed; and what has been the financial effect in each case.

Kim Howells: None.

Performance Targets

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the target has been in each of the last five years for efficiency savings as a percentage of total running costs for each of the non-departmental public bodies for which she is responsible; and if the target was met.

Kim Howells: Information about the efficiency targets and performance of the Department's sponsored bodies can be found in their published Annual Reports, which may be obtained from the Library of the House.

Creche Facilities

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, pursuant to her answer of 22 March 2002, Official Report, column 575W, regarding creche facilities, how many places were taken up in 2001–02 at the four central London sites to which she refers.

Kim Howells: During 2001–02 a total of five places were taken up at the four central London sites referred to.

Non-Departmental Public Bodies

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the cost in 2001–02 was of the pay increase to staff in her Department, agencies and the non-departmental public bodies for which she is responsible; and what the cost of the forthcoming increase will be in 2002–03.

Kim Howells: With regard to pay settlements made in 2001 by the sponsored bodies for which information is available, estimates of the annual cost of the pay increase at the time of the settlement are set out below. The average headline settlement was 3.48 per cent. The Department cannot give costs for 2002–03 because pay increases have not yet been agreed.
	
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 Department for Culture, Media and Sport 407,139 
			 Arts Council of England 229,326 
			 British Library 1,183,000 
			 British Museum 1,199,800 
			 British Tourist Authority 266,000 
			 Broadcasting Standards Commission 33,842 
			 Community Fund 590,000 
			 English Heritage 764,000 
			 English Tourism Council 50,000 
			 Film Council 144,979 
			 Horniman Museum & Gardens 66,600 
			 Imperial War Museum 298,178 
			 Millennium Commission 107,000 
			 Museum of London 119,735 
			 Museum of Science and Industry for Manchester 46,700 
			 National Gallery 466,000 
			 National Heritage Memorial Fund 175,000 
			 National Maritime Museum 180,000 
			 National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside 358,000 
			 National Museum of Science & Industry 625,760 
			 National Portrait Gallery 159,000 
			 Natural History Museum 991,307 
			 New Opportunities Fund 176,625 
			 Registrar of Public Lending Right 6,592 
			 Resource (Council for Museums, Archives & Libraries) 86,433 
			 Royal Armouries 109,000 
			 Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts 19,408 
			 Sir John Soane's Museum 875 
			 Sport England 498,000 
			 Tate Gallery 496,288 
			 UK Sport 165,810 
			 Victoria and Albert Museum 778,000 
			 Wallace Collection 50,735

Televised Music

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will introduce proposals in the Communications Bill for the Government to take responsibility for reviewing the amount of televised music on terrestrial television.

Kim Howells: The Government's proposals for the future regulation of communications will be set out in a draft Communications Bill which we expect to publish shortly. It is, however, a long-standing principle that the Government does not itself take responsibility for the scheduling or content of broadcasting and we do not propose to do so.

Bishopsgate Goods Yard

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what communication she has received from the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions since 20 January about Bishopsgate Goods Yard.

Kim Howells: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and DCMS officials have had contact with DTLR Ministers and officials since 20 January about Bishopsgate Goods Yard.
	Discussions centred on the impact of any listing of the Braithwaite Viaduct or the buildings in the Goods Yard on the new East London Line Extension project. The Secretary of State's decision to add the Braithwaite Viaduct to the list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest was announced on 8 March.

HEALTH

Overseas Treatment

Peter Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients received treatment abroad at the direction and expense of the NHS in (a) 2002 to date and (b) each of the last three years.

John Hutton: Under the pilot scheme to treat NHS patients overseas 181 patients received treatment overseas between 18 January and 12 April 2002.
	The E112 scheme is the process through which patients may receive treatment in other European Economic Area (EEA) countries at the expense of the NHS. Applications are almost always instigated by patients rather than at the direction of the NHS. 310 applications for treatment were approved between 1 January and 12 April 2002. The figures for the last three years were as follows:
	
		
			  
		
		
			 1999 860 
			 2000 1100 
			 2001 1140 
		
	
	All the above figures are for Great Britain and rounded to the nearest 10. They relate to applications approved during the relevant period, rather than individuals treated; some applications will have been in respect of the same individual. Moreover, some treatments approved in one year may have taken place the following year.

Websites

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 27 February, Official Report, column 1405W, concerning the Departmental website, what the reasons are for the increase in (i) hosting and maintenance charges and (ii) website development costs.

Yvette Cooper: The increase in hosting and maintenance charges for the Departmental website between 1998 and 2002 was caused by two factors:
	(a) the number of databases made available increased from one at the beginning of 1998 to around sixty in 2002. Hosting for each is charged separately; and
	(b) Office of Government Commerce's charging arrangements for website hosting and maintenance changed annually during the period 1998 to 2002.
	The increase in website development costs was due to the following factors:
	(a) The increase in size of the site from 100 to over 80,000 pages in the six years since its launch, and the increase in use of the Internet as a publishing vehicle for departmental publications, has meant that the information has had to be substantially reorganised.
	(b) Other changes have been made in order to meet the Office of the e-Envoy's "Guidelines for UK government websites" on Accessibility and Usability.
	(c) User research and ongoing customer and stakeholder feedback has prompted redesign work to improve the site's navigational structure, the search engine and the choice of document format available.

Violent Patients

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which health authorities have implemented schemes to provide safe havens in which violent patients can be treated.

John Hutton: The Department issued Health Service Circular 2000–01 "Tackling violence towards GPs and their staff" to health authorities on 28 January 2000. Health authorities were asked to audit levels of violence, assess risk and put appropriate plans into place which address safer working, in close consultation with local medical committees (LMCs).
	A recent survey of fifty LMCs found that 22 health authorities had provided advice on how to deal with violent patients; 10 had provided secure facilities for consultation and treatment of violent patients; 4 had other successful schemes in place; and 9 health authorities and LMCs had discussions in progress.
	The following health authorities have secure facilities or other schemes in place:
	Health Authority areas where secure facilities are provided:
	Southampton
	Suffolk
	South Derbyshire
	Liverpool
	Avon
	Nottingham
	North Warwickshire
	Hillingdon
	Camden and Islington
	Hampshire & Isle of Wight
	Health Authority areas where other related schemes are in place:
	East and West Kent
	Lincolnshire
	Wirral
	Gloucestershire

Workforce Numbers Advisory Board

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what resources are used to enable the work of Workforce Numbers Advisory Board to continue.

John Hutton: The Workforce Numbers Advisory Board (WNAB) is part of the Department's new workforce planning structures. It plays a key role in determining future commissioning levels and engaging the NHS in planning the future workforce.
	It does not have a budget but is supported by civil servants and may call upon the resources of the Department to commission work as required.

Neo-natal Units

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many positions in neo-natal units in each health authority area have been vacant for over three months.

John Hutton: Information about the number of vacant positions in neo-natal units is not collected. Staff for neo-natal units comprises neonatal nurses, midwives, paediatric nurses, other nursing staff and paediatricians. Vacancy information is only available for midwives and paediatric nurses and this is shown in the table.
	
		Department of Health Vacancies Survey, March 2001 -- Vacancies in NHS Trusts by Region, HA area and NHS Trust, in the specified staff groups3 month vacancy rates(1),(2) and numbers(3)
		
			Qualified paediatric nurses  Qualified midwives 
			 Region/HA Code HA Name 3 month vacancy rates (per cent) 3 month vacancies Staff in post (wte) Staff in post (hc) 3 month vacancy rates (per cent) 3 month vacancies Staff in post (wte) Staff in post (hc) 
		
		
			 England  3.6  510 13,640 16,920 2.6  470 17,640 22,550 
			  Northern and Yorkshire 2.8  50 1,730 2,090 0.7  20 2,200 2,690 
			 QDD Bradford HA 1.6 0 160 190 0.1 0 250 300 
			 QDE County Durham & Darlington HA 0.0 0 80 100 0.0 0 160 190 
			 QDF East Riding & Hull HA 1.1 0 90 110 0.0 0 170 210 
			 QDG Gateshead & South Tyneside HA 1.4 0 50 80 0.0 0 130 160 
			 QDH Leeds HA 7.9 30 320 370 1.5 0 270 340 
			 QDJ Newcastle & North Tyneside HA 0.9 0 420 510 1.1 0 180 220 
			 QDK North Cumbria HA 5.6 0 30 40 2.4 0 100 140 
			 QDM Northumberland HA 0.0 0 30 40 0.0 0 130 150 
			 QDN Sunderland HA 0.0 0 100 120 0.0 0 100 120 
			 QDP Tees HA 3.3 10 150 180 1.8 0 200 240 
			 QDQ Wakefield HA 1.4 0 70 90 0.0 0 140 170 
			 QDR North Yorkshire HA 1.3 0 80 110 0.0 0 220 270 
			 QDT Calderdale & Kirklees HA 3.2 0 130 170 2.1 0 150 180 
			 Trent  0.3  10 1,570 1,940 0.1  0 1,820 2,280 
			 QCG Barnsley HA 0.0 0 40 50 0.0 0 90 100 
			 QCH North Derbyshire HA 0.0 0 70 90 0.0 0 100 120 
			 QCJ Southern Derbyshire HA 0.0 0 120 150 0.0 0 160 190 
			 QCK Doncaster HA 0.0 0 20 30 0.0 0 120 150 
			 QCL Leicestershire HA 0.0 0 260 340 0.0 0 300 390 
			 QCM Lincolnshire HA 1.1 0 110 140 1.3 0 190 260 
			 QCN North Nottinghamshire HA 1.3 0 70 80 0.0 0 120 140 
			 QCP Nottingham HA 0.7 0 400 470 0.0 0 300 390 
			 QCQ Rotherham HA 0.0 0 50 60 0.0 0 80 100 
			 QCR Sheffield HA 0.0 0 350 430 0.0 0 220 280 
			 QDL South Humber HA 0.0 0 90 110 0.0 0 130 160 
			  West Midlands 4.7  80 1,670 2,030 1.9  40 2,100 2,700 
			 QD9 Birmingham HA 6.8 60 880 1,030 2.7 20 630 790 
			 QEA Coventry HA 16.1 10 60 80 7.7 10 140 190 
			 QEC Dudley HA 4.3 0 40 50 4.6 0 100 170 
			 QED Herefordshire HA 2.5 0 20 30 0.0 0 60 70 
			 QEE Sandwell HA 3.8 0 50 60 0.0 0 80 100 
			 QEF Shropshire HA 0.0 0 90 110 4.0 10 160 210 
			 QEG Solihull HA * * * * * * * * 
			 QEH North Staffordshire HA 0.0 0 210 240 0.0 0 180 220 
			 QEJ South Staffordshire HA 0.0 0 60 70 0.0 0 170 210 
			 QEK Walsall HA 0.0 0 60 70 0.0 0 130 150 
			 QEL Warwickshire HA 5.9 0 30 40 0.6 0 150 200 
			 QEM Wolverhampton HA 0.0 0 110 150 0.0 0 110 140 
			 QEN Worcestershire HA 0.0 0 60 90 0.0 0 200 260 
			 North West  1.6  40 2,380 3,010 1.0  30 2,880 3,550 
			 QC1 South Lancashire HA * * * * 0.0 0 30 40 
			 QC2 Liverpool HA 0.8 10 650 840 0.0 0 180 230 
			 QC3 Manchester HA 5.3 10 160 210 2.7 10 350 410 
			 QC4 Morecambe Bay HA 0.0 0 70 90 2.1 0 90 120 
			 QC5 St Helens & Knowsley HA 7.0 10 70 80 0.0 0 100 120 
			 QC6 Salford & Trafford HA 2.2 10 550 670 2.9 10 180 220 
			 QC7 Sefton HA 3.6 0 30 40 0.0 0 210 280 
			 QC8 Stockport HA 0.0 0 40 60 0.0 0 140 160 
			 QC9 West Pennine HA 0.6 0 160 210 0.0 0 150 180 
			 QCT Bury & Rochdale HA 0.0 0 50 70 0.0 0 160 190 
			 QCV North Cheshire HA 10.2 0 40 50 3.0 0 130 170 
			 QCW South Cheshire HA 0.0 0 120 150 0.0 0 250 330 
			 QCX East Lancashire HA 0.0 0 130 160 0.0 0 230 280 
			 QCY North West Lancashire HA 0.0 0 120 150 0.0 0 260 330 
			 QDA Wigan & Bolton HA 0.0 0 100 120 0.0 0 270 310 
			 QDC Wirral HA 0.0 0 90 110 4.5 10 140 180 
			 Eastern  2.7  20 780 1,030 4.5  80 1,610 2,150 
			 QA6 Bedfordshire HA 0.0 0 100 130 4.0 10 190 270 
			 QAX North Essex HA 0.0 0 110 150 5.0 20 300 370 
			 QAY South Essex HA 0.0 0 100 110 1.4 0 210 260 
			 QCF Suffolk HA 1.7 0 60 100 0.0 0 110 150 
			 QCP Nottingham HA 0.7 0 400 470 0.0 0 300 390 
			 QEP East & North Hertfordshire HA 15.5 10 70 100 14.2 30 160 210 
			 QEQ West Hertfordshire HA 0.0 0 70 90 9.7 20 170 240 
			 QER Cambridgeshire HA 2.0 0 190 240 0.0 0 240 310 
			 QET Norfolk HA 4.4 0 90 120 2.2 10 240 340 
			 London  5.9  180 2,830 3,320 6.9  200 2,670 3,400 
			 QA2 Hillingdon HA 0.0 0 30 60 0.0 0 90 110 
			 QA3 Kensington, Chelsea & Westminster HA 10.4 30 240 260 2.7 10 180 220 
			 QA4 Enfield & Haringey HA 12.3 10 40 50 2.4 0 80 100 
			 QA5 Redbridge & Waltham Forest HA 27.4 10 30 30 5.3 10 180 210 
			 QAA Bexley & Greenwich HA 4.0 0 90 120 17.3 30 140 200 
			 QAC Bromley HA 7.6 0 30 40 23.6 20 70 80 
			 QAD Croydon HA 0.0 0 30 40 0.0 0 50 90 
			 QAG Kingston & Richmond HA 0.0 0 50 70 0.0 0 120 170 
			 QAH Lambeth, Southwark & Lewisham HA 4.4 30 570 670 6.4 20 340 380 
			 QAJ Merton, Sutton & Wandsworth HA 7.5 20 190 250 3.4 10 290 380 
			 QAP Barking & Havering HA 20.5 10 40 50 4.9 10 120 150 
			 QAQ Barnet HA 0.0 0 80 100 2.1 0 160 210 
			 QAR Brent & Harrow HA 18.1 10 50 70 0.0 0 140 170 
			 QAT Camden & Islington HA 3.5 40 1,070 1,150 0.0 0 180 230 
			 QAV Ealing, Hammersmith & Hounslow HA 11.8 10 100 130 8.4 20 260 380 
			 QAW East London & The City HA 5.8 10 200 250 18.0 60 280 340 
			 South East  5.8  110 1,760 2,330 3.4  90 2,550 3,410 
			 QA7 Berkshire HA 15.7 30 140 190 3.2 10 250 320 
			 QA8 Buckinghamshire HA 7.2 10 100 140 8.8 20 210 280 
			 QAE East Kent HA 3.6 10 200 310 0.0 0 90 120 
			 QAF West Kent HA 8.2 20 180 220 6.7 30 360 480 
			 QAK East Surrey HA 20.6 20 60 70 14.9 20 110 150 
			 QAL West Surrey HA 9.4 10 100 140 1.3 0 220 320 
			 QAM East Sussex, Brighton & Hove HA 2.2 0 170 230 0.7 0 140 170 
			 QAN West Sussex HA 0.0 0 80 110 3.1 10 190 250 
			 QCC Northamptonshire HA 1.0 0 100 130 0.0 0 210 270 
			 QCE Oxfordshire HA 6.5 10 190 230 1.3 0 230 300 
			 QD1 North & Mid Hampshire HA 2.7 0 100 140 1.5 0 160 220 
			 QD2 Portsmouth & South East Hampshire HA 0.0 0 140 170 0.5 0 190 250 
			 QD3 Southampton & South West Hampshire HA 2.5 0 180 230 0.0 0 160 210 
			 QD4 Isle of Wight HA 0.0 0 20 30 0.0 0 40 70 
			 South West  3.2  30 910 1,180 1.1  20 1,800 2,380 
			 QD5 Somerset HA 0.0 0 70 90 0.0 0 160 190 
			 QD6 South & West Devon HA 0.0 0 120 150 0.4 0 240 300 
			 QD7 Wiltshire HA 18.4 10 60 80 1.3 0 310 420 
			 QD8 Avon HA 2.3 10 390 480 2.2 10 330 430 
			 QDV Cornwall & Isles of Scilly HA 2.3 0 80 100 0.0 0 170 230 
			 QDW Dorset HA 0.0 0 80 130 0.0 0 200 290 
			 QDX North East & Devon HA 5.2 0 40 50 2.5 10 200 260 
			 QDY Gloucestershire HA 4.0 0 70 100 1.0 0 190 260 
		
	
	Three month vacancies are vacancies as at 31 March 2001 which trusts are actively trying to fill, which had lasted for three months or more (wte).
	Three month vacancy rates are three month vacancies expressed as a percentage of three month vacancies plus staff in post from the September 2000 non-medical workforce censuses (whole time equivalent).
	Vacancy and staff in post numbers are rounded to the nearest ten.
	Percentages are rounded to one decimal place.
	* = figures where sum of staff in post and vacancies is less than 10.
	Totals may not equal sum of component parts due to rounding.
	HA figures are based on Trusts, and do not necessarily reflect the geographical provision of healthcare.
	Due to rounding calculating the vacancy rates using the above data may not equal the actual vacancy rates. Staff in post is as at 30 September 2000.
	Due to organisational changes between September 2000 and March 2001 the totals for East Surrey HA and West Sussex HA may not equal previously published data.
	Due to a different method of rounding, figures may not equal previously published data.

Property Sales

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much money has been raised through the auction of (a) empty and (b) surplus NHS property since the publication of the NHS National Plan.

John Hutton: The "one-off auction of empty and surplus NHS property" referred to in the NHS Plan is currently proceeding as a Public Private Partnership disposal of the majority of the Department's retained estate which was left following establishment of National Health Service Trusts and the transfer of property to them.
	This disposal has been advertised through the Official Journal of the European Community process, and an "Invitation to Negotiate' has been issued to four prospective partners.
	In the meantime, since publication of the NHS Plan, disposals of empty and surplus property have realised some £280 million.

Cardiology Services

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients were waiting for in-patient cardiology treatment in each quater since March 1997.

John Hutton: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		Inpatient Waiting List by Quarter—Cardiology & Cardiothoracic Surgery Specialties
		
			 Year Quarter Total 
		
		
			 1996–7 4 36,000 
			 1997–8 4 38,000 
			 1998–9 1 38,000 
			 1998–9 2 37,000 
			 1998–9 3 38,000 
			 1998–9 4 35,000 
			 1999–0 1 37,000 
			 1999–0 2 36,000 
			 1999–0 3 39,000 
			 1999–0 4 38,000 
			 2000–1 1 41,000 
			 2000–1 2 40,000 
			 2000–1 3 41,000 
			 2000–1 4 38,000 
			 2001–2 1 40,000 
			 2001–2 2 40,000 
			 2001–2 3 41,000 
		
	
	Source:
	DH KH07 form.
	Note:
	Specialty level figures were not collected for Q1–Q3 1997–8.

Chlamydia

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of the population of England has access to opportunistic chlamydia screening.

Yvette Cooper: The information is not collected centrally. A national chlamydia screening programme will start to be phased in later this year to reduce undiagnosed infections. The details of the programme are still being developed but will build on learning from the successful pilots in Portsmouth and the Wirral. The programme will involve opportunistic screening in healthcare settings such as community contraception and genitourinary medicine clinics.

Health Action Zones

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how the performance of health action zones is monitored against the local priorities identified when the establishment of the first wave of health action zones was announced on 31 March 1998.

John Hutton: Health Action Zones (HAZs) were initially set up to focus on local geographical or client group priorities. Until 31 March 2002, these were monitored by the lead health authority for the HAZ. From April 2002 onwards, principal responsibility for performance management of the National Health Service will be undertaken by the 28 new strategic health authorities.

Cancelled Operations

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he intends to take to broaden the definition of a cancelled operation.

John Hutton: Data on cancelled operations are currently collected for last minute cancellations, where a hospital cancels a patient for non-clinical reasons on the day the patient is due to arrive or after arrival in hospital, and on where a hospital cancels a patient for non-clinical reasons on the day of surgery.
	Data are also collected on the number of patients readmitted within 30 days of cancellation (Patients Charter standard) and within 28 days of cancellation (NHS Plan guarantee).
	There are no current plans to broaden the definition of a cancelled operation.

NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the activities of the NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust.

John Hutton: The NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust (NHS LIFT) initiative was announced in the NHS Plan. The objective of this initiative is to contribute to the overall NHS Plan targets of refurbishing or replacing up to 3,000 premises and 500 new one stop primary care centres by December 2004.
	The NHS LIFT approach will bring together a number of individual developments providing a more co-ordinated approach to service development as well as helping to reduce procurement costs. New buildings provided under LIFTs will also enable the co-location of GP and community services, and wherever possible the location of social care agencies.
	As a first step, a new public private partnership, Partnerships for Health (PfH) was established between the Department and Partnerships UK in September 2001. PfH will help localities develop and establish local LIFT companies. These local companies will be owned jointly by PfH, the local health economy and the private sector, and will build and develop premises, which will be leased to GPs and other primary care users.
	In February 2001 the Department prioritised an initial six LIFT schemes, and in January 2002 a further twelve LIFT schemes were identified. Further announcements will be made later this year about a third wave of sites.
	Two of the first-wave schemes (East London and the City and Camden and Islington), recently issued tender documentation, and it is expected that the other four first-wave schemes will issue their documentation in the near future. The value of the initial investment requirement in East London & City is £62.5 million and in Camden & Islington is £17 million.

General Practitioners

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 11 March, Official Report, column 806W, on general practitioners, what amount of time he expects a GP appraiser to spend on appraisals every year which would otherwise be spent on patient care.

John Hutton: The introduction of General Practitioner appraisal will not be to the detriment of patient care. Indeed, over time we expect GP appraisal to contribute towards improving the quality of National Health Service primary care services offered to local communities. Research suggests that it is reasonable for a primary care trust to expect a GP appraiser to undertake between 10 and 25 appraisals annually. GPs' contractual frameworks include provision spend time on activities other than direct patient care. It will, of course, not always be possible to accommodate all appraisal activity without reducing the time available to the individual GP appraiser for direct patient care. In such cases detailed arrangements will need to be agreed between the primary care trust, the GP appraiser and his/her practice or personal medical services pilot provider. But we have made it clear that all primary care trusts should have a funded policy on the provision of locum cover, to support the implementation of GP appraisal.

General Practitioners

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the cost was of the National Survey of GP Services.

John Hutton: The cost of the National Survey of NHS Patients: 1998 General Practice survey was £788,000.

General Practitioners

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects to complete his discussions with the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges to establish an evaluation process for international general practitioner recruitment; and when he expects such evaluation to commence.

John Hutton: Discussions are underway with the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges. We aim to begin a full evaluation of the whole International Recruitment process later this year.

Overseas Recruitment

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the (a) total number and (b) percentage is of overseas nurses working in the UK as a proportion of nursing staff, by regional health authority in (i) the NHS and (ii) agencies in each of the last three years for which figures are available.

John Hutton: The information requested is not collected centrally.
	In order to practise as a nurse overseas applicants must register with the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), formerly the United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing Midwifery and Health Visiting. Overseas nurses registered with the NMC do not necessarily work in the National Health Service. The number of entrants to the register in the last three years are in the table below.
	Overseas trained nurses and midwives registering with the UKCC
	
		
			  1998–1999 1999–2000 2000–2001 
		
		
			 Overseas nurses registered with the UKCC 3,621 5,945 8,403

Overseas Recruitment

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many overseas doctors there were working in the UK as a proportion of all doctors practising on NHS patients, broken down by regional health authority in (a) the NHS and (b) agencies in each of the last three years for which figures are available.

John Hutton: Regional health authorities were abolished in 1996 and replaced by regional offices, the data has therefore been broken down by regional office. The Department does not collect data on the number of overseas doctors working in the UK broken down by agencies.
	Available information is shown in the tables. One table contains headcount figures, the other table contains percentage figures.
	
		General Medical Practitioners 1  and Hospital, Public Health Medicine and Community Health Services (HCHS): medical staff 2  within each region and by country of qualification -- numbers
		
			199920002001  
			  All Staff United Kingdom Rest of EEA Elsewhere All Staff United Kingdom Rest of EEA Elsewhere All Staff United Kingdom Rest of EEA Elsewhere 
		
		
			 England 91,340 66,330 4,850 20,160 93,910 68,060 4,770 21,070 96,790 69,830 4,810 22,140 
			 Northern & Yorkshire 11,680 8,600 630 2,460 12,030 8,830 620 2,570 12,490 9,170 600 2,720 
			 Trent 9,130 6,570 400 2,160 9,260 6,720 380 2,160 9,570 6,970 380 2,220 
			 West Midlands 9,360 6,450 510 2,400 9,410 6,500 480 2,420 9,770 6,680 480 2,610 
			 North West 13,150 8,590 770 3,790 13,570 8,770 770 4,030 13,780 8,970 720 4,090 
			 Eastern 10,720 8,070 550 2,100 10,840 8,180 510 2,150 11,240 8,400 540 2,300 
			 London 16,370 12,520 980 2,870 17,180 12,960 1,040 3,180 17,800 13,340 1,090 3,370 
			 South East 12,050 8,640 610 2,790 12,410 8,930 560 2,920 12,880 9,100 630 3,160 
			 South Western 9,100 7,080 410 1,610 9,470 7,370 410 1,690 9,820 7,600 400 1,820 
		
	
	Notes:
	(1) General Medical Practioners include GMS Unrestricted Principals, PMS Contracted GPs, PMS Salaried GPs, Restricted Principals, Assistants, GP Registrars, Salaried Doctors (Para 52 SFA), PMS Other and GP Retainers.
	(2) Excludes Hospital Practitioners and Clinical Assistants most of whom are also GPs working part time in hospitals Figures are rounded to the nearest ten.
	Source:
	Department of Health medical and dental workforce census as at 30 September each year.
	Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics as at 1 October 1999 and 30 September 2000 and 2001.
	
		General Medical Practitioners(3) and Hospital, Public Health Medicine and Community Health Services (HCHS): medical staff(4) within each region and by country of qualification -- percentages(5)
		
			199920002001  
			  All Staff United Kingdom Rest of EEA Elsewhere All Staff United Kingdom Rest of EEA Elsewhere All Staff United Kingdom Rest of EEA Elsewhere 
		
		
			 England 100% 72.6% 5.3% 22.1% 100% 72.5% 5.1% 22.4% 100% 72.2% 5.0% 22.9% 
			 Northern & Yorkshire 100% 73.6% 5.4% 21.1% 100% 73.4% 5.2% 21.4% 100% 73.4% 4.8% 21.8% 
			 Trent 100% 72.0% 4.3% 23.7% 100% 72.6% 4.1% 23.3% 100% 72.8% 3.9% 23.2% 
			 West Midlands 100% 68.8% 5.5% 25.7% 100% 69.1% 5.1% 25.7% 100% 68.4% 4.9% 26.7% 
			 North West 100% 65.3% 5.8% 28.8% 100% 64.6% 5.7% 29.7% 100% 65.1% 5.2% 29.7% 
			 Eastern 100% 75.3% 5.1% 19.6% 100% 75.5% 4.7% 19.8% 100% 74.8% 4.8% 20.5% 
			 London 100% 76.5% 6.0% 17.5% 100% 75.5% 6.1% 18.5% 100% 75.0% 6.1% 18.9% 
			 South East 100% 71.7% 5.1% 23.2% 100% 71.9% 4.5% 23.6% 100% 70.6% 4.9% 24.5% 
			 South Western 100% 77.8% 4.5% 17.7% 100% 77.8% 4.4% 17.8% 100% 77.3% 4.1% 18.5% 
		
	
	Notes:
	(3) General Medical Practioners include GMS Unrestricted Principals, PMS Contracted GPs, PMS Salaried GPs, Restricted Principals, Assistants, GP Registrars, Salaried Doctors (Para 52 SFA), PMS Other and GP Retainers.
	(4) Excludes Hospital Practitioners and Clinical Assistants most of whom are also GPs working part time in hospitals.
	(5) Percentages were calculated using unrounded figures.
	Source:
	Department of Health medical and dental workforce census as at 30 September each year.
	Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics as at 1 October 1999 and 30 September 2000 and 2001.

Midwives

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is, by regional health authority, (a) the total number of full-time and (b) part-time midwives and what the (i) modal, (ii) mean and (iii) median age is of midwives for each of the last three years for which figures are available.

John Hutton: Regional Health Authorities were abolished in 1996. Information on midwives working full time and part time by Health Authority is shown in the table. The information about age is as follows.
	
		NHS Hospital and Community Health Services (HCHS): Modal, mean and median ages of midwives in England as at 30 September each year
		
			headcount 
			  1999 2000 2001 
		
		
			 Mode 35 38 37 
			 Mean 40 41 41 
			 Median 39 40 40 
		
	
	Notes:Figures exclude bank staff, learners and agency staff.
	Source:
	Department of Health Non-Medical Workforce Census.
	
		NHS Hospital and Community Health Services (HCHS): Mean, median and modal ages of midwives in England -- as at 30 September each yearheadcount
		
			199920002001  
			   Total Full-time Part-time Bank Total Full-time Part-time Bank Total Full-time Part-time Bank 
			  
		
		
			  England total 22,800 11,070 9,840 1,900 22,570 10,660 10,200 1,710 23,080 10,720 10,780 1,570 
			  Northern & Yorkshire 2,650 1,360 1,210 80 2,700 1,360 1,260 70 3,000 1,500 1,390 110 
			 QDD Bradford HA 280 170 110 10 300 170 120 10 310 170 130 10 
			 QDE County Durham & Darlington HA 190 100 90 — 190 100 90 10 200 100 100 10 
			 QDF East Riding & Hull HA 230 100 120 10 210 100 100 * 240 100 120 20 
			 QDG Gateshead & South Tyneside HA 170 80 70 20 160 80 70 10 180 90 60 20 
			 QDH Leeds HA 290 160 110 20 340 180 130 30 330 190 130 — 
			 QDJ Newcastle & North Tyneside HA 190 110 70 — 220 120 100 — 260 140 110 * 
			 QDK North Cumbria HA 140 50 90 — 140 40 90 10 140 50 80 * 
			 QDM Northumberland HA 160 80 80 * 150 70 80 — 170 70 80 20 
			 QDN Sunderland HA 130 80 50 — 120 80 40 — 120 80 40 — 
			 QDP Tees HA 250 120 120 * 240 130 110 * 300 150 150 — 
			 QDQ Wakefield HA 180 80 90 10 170 80 90 10 160 70 90 10 
			 QDR North Yorkshire HA 250 140 110 * 270 130 140 — 350 150 170 30 
			 QDT Calderdale & Kirklees HA 180 90 90 — 180 90 90 — 250 120 130 — 
			  Trent 2,270 1,100 1,090 80 2,280 1,040 1,190 50 2,200 940 1,220 40 
			 QCG Barnsley HA 100 60 30 * 100 60 40 — 100 60 40 — 
			 QCH North Derbyshire HA 120 70 50 * 120 60 50 * 140 70 60 * 
			 QCJ Southern Derbyshire HA 180 110 80 — 190 100 90 — 190 90 90 10 
			 QCK Doncaster HA 160 60 90 10 150 50 90 * 140 50 90 — 
			 QCL Leicestershire HA 390 190 170 40 390 180 180 30 370 160 190 20 
			 QCM Lincolnshire HA 260 100 140 10 260 100 150 10 250 90 160 — 
			 QCN North Nottinghamshire HA 140 70 70 * 140 60 80 — 90 40 40 — 
			 QCP Nottingham HA 360 170 190 — 390 160 240 — 460 170 290 — 
			 QCQ Rotherham HA 110 60 50 — 100 50 50 — 110 50 50 — 
			 QCR Sheffield HA 280 120 160 * 280 120 160 — 270 110 150 * 
			 QDL South Humber HA 160 90 70 * 160 80 80 * 80 30 50 * 
			  West Midlands 2,790 1,250 1,300 230 2,700 1,180 1,350 180 2,640 1,160 1,380 100 
			 QD9 Birmingham HA 830 400 310 120 790 390 310 80 740 380 330 20 
			 QEA Coventry HA 200 80 120 * 190 70 110 10 200 80 120 * 
			 QEC Dudley HA 160 50 80 30 170 40 80 40 160 50 90 20 
			 QED Herefordshire HA 70 30 40 * 70 30 40 — 70 30 40 * 
			 QEE Sandwell HA 100 60 20 10 100 60 20 10 100 60 20 20 
			 QEF Shropshire HA 210 50 160 — 210 40 170 — 210 40 160 — 
			 QEH North Staffordshire HA 220 110 110 — 220 110 110 — 210 90 110 — 
			 QEJ South Staffordshire HA 200 110 90 * 210 100 100 * 210 100 100 * 
			 QEK Walsall HA 160 70 80 10 150 70 80 * 150 60 80 10 
			 QEL Warwickshire HA 200 90 90 10 200 90 100 10 200 90 110 * 
			 QEM Wolverhampton HA 140 70 70 — 140 70 70 — 140 60 70 — 
			 QEN Worcestershire HA 290 120 130 40 260 100 140 20 260 100 140 20 
			  North West 3,630 1,750 1,680 210 3,550 1,700 1,700 140 3,670 1,720 1,790 170 
			 QC1 South Lancashire HA 40 30 10 — 40 30 10 — 40 30 * — 
			 QC2 Liverpool HA 230 100 120 10 240 100 120 20 340 140 200 * 
			 QC3 Manchester HA 400 240 150 — 410 240 150 20 380 230 150 * 
			 QC4 Morecambe Bay HA 120 50 60 20 120 50 70 * 160 70 90 10 
			 QC5 St Helen's & Knowsley HA 120 70 50 — 120 60 60 — 120 60 60 — 
			 QC6 Salford & Trafford HA 240 110 120 10 220 100 120 — 200 100 110 — 
			 QC7 Sefton HA 230 100 120 10 280 100 150 40 130 50 60 10 
			 QC8 Stockport HA 180 100 70 10 160 90 70 — 190 90 70 20 
			 QC9 West Pennine HA 160 90 70 — 180 90 70 20 300 110 120 60 
			 QCT Bury & Rochdale HA 210 100 110 * 190 100 100 * 200 100 100 * 
			 QCV North Cheshire HA 160 60 100 — 170 70 90 10 160 70 90 — 
			 QCW South Cheshire HA 360 140 180 40 330 140 180 10 340 140 180 20 
			 QCX East Lancashire HA 340 140 130 70 280 150 130 * 270 140 140 — 
			 QCY North West Lancashire HA 340 140 180 20 330 140 180 20 340 140 180 20 
			 QDA Wigan and Bolton HA 310 180 130 — 310 160 150 — 330 160 180 * 
			 QDC Wirral HA 190 100 70 20 180 90 70 10 180 90 70 20 
			  Eastern 2,000 920 930 150 2,150 900 970 280 2,080 880 1,000 200 
			 QA6 Bedfordshire HA 220 110 110 10 270 100 120 50 250 110 120 30 
			 QAX North Essex HA 310 150 160 * 370 140 160 70 320 150 160 — 
			 QAY South Essex HA 240 130 110 10 260 130 110 20 250 130 100 20 
			 QCF Suffolk HA 160 50 70 40 150 50 100 — 140 50 90 — 
			 QEP East & North Hertfordshire HA 220 100 100 20 200 90 90 20 * — — — 
			 QEQ West Hertfordshire HA 160 50 70 40 240 100 90 60 — — — — 
			 QER Cambridgeshire HA 420 200 190 20 310 140 140 30 420 140 170 120 
			 QET Norfolk HA 270 140 120 10 340 140 170 40 310 130 180 — 
			 QEX Hertfordshire HA — — — — — — — — 380 170 170 40 
			  London 3,700 2,060 930 710 3,400 1,940 920 540 3,530 2,010 1,020 500 
			 QA2 Hillingdon HA 230 110 70 50 100 60 40 — 110 60 50 — 
			 QA3 Kensington, Chelsea & Westminster HA 240 160 60 20 220 140 60 20 220 140 70 10 
			 QA4 Enfield & Haringey HA 100 70 20 10 100 70 20 10 * — — — 
			 QA5 Redbridge & Waltham Forest HA 220 140 70 — 210 130 80 — 120 80 40 — 
			 QAA Bexley & Greenwich HA 180 60 80 30 200 60 90 50 — — — — 
			 QAC Bromley HA 90 60 30 — 80 50 30 — — — — — 
			 QAD Croydon HA 200 60 40 100 90 30 20 40 110 50 50 10 
			 QAG Kingston & Richmond HA 180 70 80 30 160 70 70 20 160 60 70 30 
			 QAH Lambeth, Southwark & Lewisham HA 420 300 60 60 380 290 60 30 430 300 100 40 
			 QAJ Merton, Sutton & Wandsworth HA 380 190 120 60 380 180 120 80 350 190 110 50 
			 QAP Barking & Havering HA 130 90 40 * 150 90 40 20 250 140 70 40 
			 QAQ Barnet HA 220 120 60 30 210 100 60 50 — — — — 
			 QAR Brent & Harrow HA 160 100 40 20 180 100 40 40 130 80 30 10 
			 QAT Camden & Islington HA 220 140 30 60 230 140 40 50 220 150 50 20 
			 QAV Ealing, Hammersmith & Hounslow HA 330 130 60 140 380 190 90 100 440 180 100 150 
			 QAW East London & the City HA 420 260 70 80 340 230 60 40 370 260 60 50 
			 QEW Barnet, Enfield & Haringey HA — — — — — — — — 330 190 80 60 
			 QEY Bexley, Bromley & Greenwich HA — — — — — — — — 290 120 130 40 
			  South East 3,360 1,510 1,580 270 3,410 1,500 1,640 260 3,550 1,530 1,750 270 
			 QA7 Berkshire HA 310 150 120 40 320 160 130 30 340 170 140 30 
			 QA8 Buckinghamshire HA 290 140 120 30 280 130 120 30 340 130 140 70 
			 QAE East Kent HA 130 70 50 * 120 60 60 — 260 110 150 * 
			 QAF West Kent HA 510 220 200 80 480 220 200 60 440 220 190 20 
			 QAK East Surrey HA — — — — — — — — 130 70 60 * 
			 QAL West Surrey HA 290 110 140 40 320 130 150 40 280 100 150 30 
			 QAM East Sussex, Brighton & Hove HA 110 60 50 * 170 90 80 10 180 90 80 * 
			 QAN West Sussex HA 380 180 160 40 400 180 170 50 280 110 120 50 
			 QCC Northamptonshire HA 290 120 160 10 270 120 150 10 270 120 140 * 
			 QCE Oxfordshire HA 300 140 140 10 300 140 140 20 300 130 170 — 
			 QD1 North & Mid Hampshire HA 220 100 110 10 220 90 120 10 250 90 110 50 
			 QD2 Portsmouth & South East Hampshire HA 250 100 150 * 250 100 150 10 — — — — 
			 QD3 Southampton & South West Hampshire HA 210 90 120 * 210 90 120 * 180 80 110 — 
			 QD4 Isle Of Wight HA 70 20 50 — 60 10 50 — — — — — 
			 QEV Isle of Wight, Portsmouth & South East Hampshire HA — — — — — — — — 310 110 200 * 
			  South West 2,400 1,100 1,120 180 2,380 1,030 1,170 180 2,410 980 1,240 180 
			 QD5 Somerset HA 190 100 90 * 190 90 90 * 180 80 100 * 
			 QD6 South & West Devon HA 310 180 110 20 300 170 130 10 300 160 140 10 
			 QD7 Wiltshire HA 470 180 200 90 420 180 210 40 450 170 240 50 
			 QD8 Avon HA 420 190 210 10 430 180 210 40 460 150 250 50 
			 QDV Cornwall & Isles of Scilly HA 220 90 130 10 230 80 140 10 220 80 130 * 
			 QDW Dorset HA 260 110 120 30 290 110 130 60 280 110 120 50 
			 QDX North & East Devon HA 260 120 130 — 260 110 140 — 270 130 140 * 
			 QDY Gloucestershire HA 280 120 130 20 260 120 120 20 260 110 130 20 
		
	
	Notes:Figures are rounded to the nearest ten.
	Due to rounding totals may not equal the sum of component parts.
	Figures exclude learners and agency staff.
	Bank nurses work flexible hours to meet service requirements but do not have a full time or part time classification.
	* five or less and greater than zero.
	— zero.
	Source:
	Department of Health Non-Medical Workforce Census.

Cystic Fibrosis

Stephen Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how much funding the Government plans to make available for research into a cure for cystic fibrosis;
	(2)  how much funding was made available for research into cystic fibrosis in each year from (a) 1992 to 2001.

Jacqui Smith: The Medical Research Council (MRC) is the main Government agency for research into the causes of and treatments for disease and receives its funding via the Department of Trade and Industry. The expenditure figures from 1992 to 1997 are not available. The MRC spend in each year from 1997 to 2001 is shown below:
	1997–1998—£1.8 million
	1998–1999—£1.9 million
	1999–2000—£1.8 million
	2000–2001—£1.5 million
	The Department funds research to support policy and the delivery of effective practice in health and social care. The Department's expenditure since 1995 on directly commissioned research projects relating to cystic fibrosis is as follows:
	1995–1996—£143,100
	1996–1997—£50,300
	1997–1998—£40,800
	1998–1999—£8,300
	1999–2000—£113,900
	2000–2001—£71,700
	In addition to specific projects, the Department also provides support funding for research commissioned by charities and the research councils that takes place in the NHS. Management of much of the research supported by National Health Service research and development funding is devolved and expenditure at project level is not held centrally by the Department but the total investment is considerably greater than just the spend on directly commissioned projects.
	The MRC current support for cystic fibrosis includes work on gene therapy for cystic fibrosis.
	It is not possible to predict what the future total level of Government expenditure will for cystic fibrosis research as new research proposals are regularly being considered and commissioned.
	The MRC always welcomes high quality applications for research into any aspect of human health and these are judged in open competition with other demands in funding. Awards are made according to their scientific quality and importance to human health.

Blood Safety

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on blood safety in the NHS.

Yvette Cooper: About three million blood components are transfused to over a million National Health Service patients in the United Kingdom each year. This blood meets standards of safety that are among the best in the world. However, almost every medical treatment or intervention, including blood transfusion, is associated with some risk.
	The recent annual study from SHOT (Serious Hazards of Transfusion) published on 10 April 2002 is extremely valuable in assessing the safety of blood transfusion and demonstrates that blood transfusion in the UK is very safe and becoming even safer with improving technology and clinical audit. Copies of the report have been placed in the Library.
	The SHOT report demonstrates that serious adverse events associated with blood transfusion are rare. However many of them are avoidable. Improving patient safety, including reducing unintended harm to patients, is a major Government priority. The Department will be working with SHOT, the National Blood Service and the new National Patient Safety Agency on strategies to reduce the level of avoidable incidents associated with blood transfusion.

Blood Safety

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what research his Department has conducted into transfusion-related acute lung injury with particular regard to blood donated by women who have had multiple births.

Yvette Cooper: The Department has not conducted specific research in this area. However, the National Blood Authority is investigating cases of transfusion related acute lung injury to inform research in this area. The National Blood Authority is also currently evaluating options for reducing the risk to patients from this syndrome.

NHS Managerial Staff

Andrew Selous: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many managerial staff are working in the NHS.

John Hutton: The number of managers working within the Hospital and Community Health Services (HCHS) of the NHS is shown in the table.
	The annual Department of Health census of General and Personal Medical Services staff does not provide a breakdown of managerial staff.
	
		NHS Hospital and Community Health Services (HCHS): Managerial staff within the specific areas of work in England as at 30 September 2001
		
			  Whole-time Equivalents headcount 
		
		
			 All managers 34,060 35,740 
			 Of which  
			 Administration & estates 26,280 27,420 
			 Of which  
			 Senior managers 9,370 9,740 
			 Managers 16,910 17,680 
			 Nurse managers 5,230 5,590 
			 Scientific, therapeutic & technical managers 2,010 2,180 
			 Ambulance managers 540 540 
		
	
	Notes:Figures are rounded to the nearest ten.
	Due to rounding totals may not equal the sum of component parts.
	Source:
	Department of Health non-medical workforce census.

Mental Health

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures he has taken to manage diversity within care services for (a) the elderly, (b) children and (c) people with mental health problems.

Jacqui Smith: Through the National Service Framework for Older People (published in 2001), "Quality Protects" (launched in 1998), and the National Service Framework for Mental Health (published in 1999), and related initiatives, the Government is ensuring that services for older people, children and adults with mental health problems respectively are developed so that all people who need support, no matter their background and personal characteristics, can be provided with appropriate and effective help. In addition, the Government has announced that a National Service Framework for Children is being developed.

Counselling Services

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of GP practices have a counselling service attached.

John Hutton: Information about the number of counsellors employed in Primary Care is not collected centrally.
	Information is available from independent research to show that approximately half of all GPs have access to counselling and psychological therapies.

Social Services

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what strategies his Department has in place to reduce the number of temporary staff working in the social services sector.

Jacqui Smith: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State launched a £1.5 million social work recruitment campaign on 19 October 2001. The campaign consists of national advertising, information leaflets, posters, local and national public relations activity, a help line which those interested in learning more about social work can contact for further information, and a dedicated website. It has three aims, to:
	raise the number of people applying for social work training by 5000 by 2004;
	inform the public about what social workers actually do;
	make existing social workers realise that their work is valued.
	As the aim of the campaign is to attract more people to work in social care, this should in the long term reduce vacancy rates and therefore the use of agency staff to cover vacancies.
	The help line has so far received over 14,000 calls, and the website has had over 11,000 visitors. The second phase of the campaign will be launched in May.

Delayed Discharges

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many hospital beds are occupied by elderly patients waiting to be transferred to residential care homes.

Jacqui Smith: The latest information about the numbers of hospital beds occupied by older people awaiting transfer to a residential care home has been placed in the Library.

Foster Carers

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what reforms he is planning to the revenue support grant in relation to foster carers.

Jacqui Smith: The Government recognises that there are limitations to the existing Standard Spending Assessment system. That is why work is being carried out to develop a new system for 2003–4 that will be fairer and easier to understand. We have commissioned research to inform this review and we are at the early stages of discussing the findings with local government representatives. We will be consulting widely on a range of options before final decisions are taken.

Food Standards Agency

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Food Standards Agency is taking to tackle the food hygiene knowledge gap across the population.

Yvette Cooper: A key element in the Food Standard's Agency's target to reduce UK foodborne disease by 20 per cent by 2006 is a nationwide food hygiene campaign, launched on 11 February 2002, to help improve standards of food hygiene in catering premises and in the domestic setting. The campaign, which will have a five year duration, is aimed initially at the catering industry and will subsequently broaden out to include the general public.
	The Agency is also actively involved in promoting food hygiene with teachers, school children and students. The Agency and a consortium of other bodies has been involved in the development of a new web based food hygiene education package for 14–24 year olds (www.Good2Eat.info) which was launched on 15 April and has benefited from European Union financing (as part of a Europe-wide campaign on food safety). The Food Standards Agency also houses the website for two other food hygiene teaching resources, originally developed by the Health Education Authority: "Aliens in Our Food"—aimed at children at secondary schools, and "Safe T and the H Squad"—aimed at children in junior schools.
	A stakeholder workshop will be held on 7 May to consider the current level of knowledge about foodborne disease and hygiene in the home, to review current or recent Agency work and to identify any gaps in research or surveillance. The workshop will also provide an opportunity to consider how hygiene messages can be effectively targeted towards consumers.

Food Standards Agency

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the new Food Standards Agency-specific conference framework, referred to on page 41 of the 2001 report of the Food Standards Agency, was introduced by the summer of 2001.

Jacqui Smith: A competence framework specific to the Food Standards Agency was introduced in October 2001. This reflects the Agency's values and way of working.

Food Standards Agency

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the tailored management development programme of the Food Standards Agency referred to on page 41 of the 2001 report of the Food Standards Agency.

Yvette Cooper: The Food Standards Agency (FSA) management scheme, which was launched in October 2001, is a major part of the Agency's general training and development programme. It has been prepared to help equip all managers in the FSA with the relevant knowledge, skills and behaviours required to support the Agency's way of working and its core values.

Food Standards Agency

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the establishment of the baseline, referred to on page 41 of the 2001 report of the Food Standards Agency, in the context of the first staff survey conducted by the Agency.

Yvette Cooper: The first Food Standards Agency staff attitude survey was carried out in October 2000. The results were used as a baseline for comparison with the 2001 staff attitude survey, which took place at the end of 2001.

Food Standards Agency

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the Service Delivery Agreement target to develop and implement a cost-effective strategy to reduce the incidence of food-borne illness in humans has been met.

Yvette Cooper: Yes. The strategy was agreed by the Food Standards Agency's board at the public board meeting held on 9 May 2001 and has been published on the Agency's website. Six monthly updates on progress are presented to the board and these papers are also published on the Agency's website.

Food Standards Agency

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the Service Delivery Agreement target of the Food Standards Agency to contribute to the renegotiation of the European Meat Hygiene Directive so as better to protect public health and produce a more efficient enforcement system has been met.

Yvette Cooper: The European Meat Hygiene Directive is being consolidated into four new European Union Food Hygiene Regulations. The Food Standards Agency has contributed to the negotiations that have taken place to date on the proposals and also on a Commission decision, agreed last April, which requires the introduction of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) based controls in licensed meat plants. It is considered that the introduction of HACCP based controls will provide better protection for public health. The Commission, having withdrawn earlier proposals on official controls, is expected to publish new proposals shortly and the Agency will take part in the subsequent negotiations with a view to achieving a legislative base for a more efficient enforcement system.

Photodynamic Therapy

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his policy is regarding photodynamic therapy and its availability on the NHS.

Jacqui Smith: At present, photodynamic therapy is not routinely available under the National Health Service. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) is carrying out an appraisal of the use of photodynamic therapy in the treatment of macular disease, which they expect to complete in July, providing there are no appeals.
	The Department has asked NHS bodies to continue with local arrangements for the managed introduction of new technologies where guidance from NICE is not available at the time the technology first became available. These arrangements should involve an assessment of all relevant factors including the available evidence on effect.

Equipment Assistance (Personal Care)

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his policy is on providing people on income support with special equipment to help with personal care.

Jacqui Smith: People on income support who need equipment to help with personal care have it provided on the same basis as other people with the same needs. Equipment provided by the National Health Service is free of charge to all. Equipment provided by local councils may attract a charge according to local policy.

Fluoride

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans there are to distribute fluoridated milk in schools.

Yvette Cooper: Decisions on whether to offer fluoridated milk in schools are taken locally following consultation between the community dental service, the school and parents. There are currently seven fluoridated milk schemes at schools in the North West and Yorkshire.

Scanners

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases of cancer were detected using (a) x-rays and (b) CT scanners in each hospital trust in the last 12 months.

Yvette Cooper: This information requested is not available. Information on the numbers of diagnostic tests undertaken annually does not record the clinical outcome of each individual test.

NHSnet

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the PSA target to connect all GP surgeries to NHSnet by the end of 2002 will be met.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 10 April 2002
	We are on track to meet target. There are likely be some dispensations agreed with Health Authorities for a small number of surgeries where it would not be practical or cost-effective to install a connection for a short period (e.g. where the GP is about to retire, or working from temporary premises).

Equal Treatment

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what progress he has achieved in establishing a baseline for policy appraisal against which to measure progress on equal treatment;
	(2)  will list the subject of each gender impact assessment drawn up by his Department since June 1997, indicating in each case whether the outcome has been (a) put out to consultation and (b) published.

Jacqui Smith: holding answer 10 April 2002
	The Department of Health is committed to providing equality of opportunity in all aspects of its work and gender is one aspect to be considered along with race, disability, age and sexual orientation. All policy development must support of the core principles in the NHS Plan, one of which states that the NHS of the 21st century must be responsive to the needs of different groups and individuals within society and challenge discrimination on the grounds of age, gender, ethnicity, religion, disability and sexuality. The Department has been working with the Women and Equality unit on the production of the health section of its forthcoming publication "Key Indicators of Women's Position in Britain".
	The Department has also been working in collaboration with the Women and Equality Unit at the Cabinet Office on two case studies to test out the methodology developed by the Unit for assessing gender impact. These are the development of the National Service Framework for Diabetes and the implementation of the National Service Framework for Mental Health. These case studies are nearing completion.
	The Diabetes National Service Framework was announced in April 1999 and the standard document to support the NSF was published in December 2001. The report of the use of the Gender Impact Assessment tool in the production of these standards is expected to be published via the Cabinet Office website in the near future. The Diabetes National Service Framework: Standards were developed with the help of an expert reference group with a wide range of representative interests, including service users. The Delivery Strategy will be published later this year and consultation on the contents is being undertaken through the department's website.
	Gender impact assessment has been used in developing a strategy around women's mental health. The development of a strategy was announced in March 2001. A consultation document on the women's mental health strategy is to be published in the next few months. A three month formal consultation period will follow.

Press and Public Relations

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the answer given to the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. Turner) of 20 March 2002, Official Report, column 436W, how much the increase in personnel employed in a press or public relations function in his Department since 1997 has cost.

John Hutton: holding answer 10 April 2002
	The annual costs of personnel employed in the Departments Communications Directorate since 1997–98 are shown in the table below (£,000):
	
		
			 Year News Publicity NHS Communications Total 
		
		
			 1997–98 1,062 1,216 399 2,677 
			 1998–99 1,239 1,122 496 2,857 
			 1999–02 1,253 1,276 543 3,072 
			 2000–01 1,233 839 1,159 3,231 
			 2001–02 1,265 904 1,182 3,351 
		
	
	1. It is not possible to provide a comparable breakdown of costs. The figures provided include all Communications Directorate staff (staff and staff related costs).
	2. For the financial year 2001–02 the annual budget figures are shown as the final expenditure figures are not yet available.

Illegal Meat Imports

Alan Reid: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures the Food Standards Agency is taking to detect infected meat which has been imported from abroad and (a) is unsafe for human consumption and (b) could pass the infection to a farm animal; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 11 April 2002
	European Union (EU) food hygiene legislation on meat for human consumption requires that all meat sold on the single market must be fit for human consumption, and free from animal diseases. It must have passed the specified health checks under veterinary supervision, and have been awarded the appropriate health mark.
	Meat produced within the EU may circulate freely on the single market, and is not subject to border controls. However, imports of meat from other EU states are subject to random checks by the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) at meat cutting plants, or by local authorities in meat plants under their supervision. Following problems over the presence of Specified Risk Material in contravention of BSE rules, the Food Standards Agency has instructed the MHS to inspect every single consignment of imported carcass beef.
	All meat imports from third countries also have to satisfy the conditions set out in EU food hygiene and import legislation. The latter includes prior notification and importation through EU authorised Border Inspection Posts (BIPs). In the BIP, the meat is subject to a 100 per cent check of identity and documentation, and a random physical check. The controls cover both public and animal health aspects with responsibility resting respectively with the Food Standards Agency and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Local authorities, including port health authorities, have day-to-day responsibility for enforcement of the import legislation in BIPs.
	Agency officials are exploring proposals made in a report approved by the Board of the Food Standards Agency with a view to making a number of improvements to controls on imports at ports, and have already issued written guidance to port health authorities and local authorities to ensure there is continued vigilance and checks on imported products both at the point of import and at the retail level. In addition the Food Standards Agency is taking an active role in interdepartmental initiatives led by DEFRA aimed at co-ordinating action across Government concerned with illegal imports of meat.

Sussex Ambulance Service

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what has been the total cost to public funds since 1 May 1997 from the work carried out, including consultation processes, on the future configuration of the ambulance service serving Sussex.

Jacqui Smith: holding answer 15 April 2002
	The information is not held centrally.

Treatment Costs

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information he collates on (a) the cost of procedures in NHS hospitals and (b) the charges for procedures in private hospitals and private beds in NHS hospitals.

John Hutton: holding answer 16 April 2002
	Reference costs data is the main source of cost data on individual treatments and procedures in the National Health Service. This information is collected annually from NHS providers (including primary care trusts) and is analysed to produce national average costs which are published.
	The level of detail is dependent on the services. Inpatient and day case episodes are sub-divided into over 500 Healthcare Resource Groups (HRGs). HRGs are groups of clinically similar procedures and treatments which are iso-resource. They are developed by clinicians, and signed off by the respective Royal Colleges.
	Outpatient attendances are, at a minimum, analysed on the number of first and follow up attendances for each specialty. Some specialties are analysed using more sophisticated workload measures. Full details can be found on the Department's website and copies of the Reference Costs 2001 publication are in the Library.
	The Department does not collect information on charges for procedures either in private or NHS hospitals for private patients. It has, however, carried out a survey of NHS health authorities and trusts on the acute elective activity they commissioned from the independent sector last year and the related costs, and will make available key results shortly.

NHS Finance

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what deficit or surplus was carried forward by each NHS trust, health authority and primary care trust and group in England at the beginning of financial years (a) 2000–01, (b) 2001–02 and (c) 2002–03.

John Hutton: holding answer 16 April 2002
	Information relating to NHS trust surpluses and deficits for the 2000–01 financial year has been placed in the library. The NHS trust information requested for 2001–02 and 2002–03 will not be available until the annual audited accounts are completed and published for those financial years.
	In anticipation of the introduction of Resource accounting and budgeting across all Government departments from April 2001, a change made to the format of the annual accounts from 2000–01 means that health authorities (including Primary Care Groups) and primary care trusts, are no longer required to account on an income & expenditure basis. The concept of income and expenditure deficits and surpluses is, therefore, no longer applicable, having been replaced by a measure which seeks to ensure that health authorities and primary care trusts live within the approved resource limits set by the Department.

NHS Finance

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what powers regional NHS officials have to claw back (a) unspent allocations at the end of the year for which they have been allocated and (b) ring-fenced allocations and special purpose grants during the year for which they have been allocated.

John Hutton: holding answer 16 April 2002
	HM Treasury allows the Department to carry forward under spends from one year to the next. In turn, the Department allows the NHS this same flexibility.
	Section 97(6) of the NHS Act 1977 as amended provides for the Secretary of State to issue directions to ring fence specific allotments of funding. Ring fenced funding may only be used for the purposes specified in such directions. The Secretary of State may, under section 97(5) of the NHS Act 1977 as amended, claw back under spends of ring fenced funding. However this has not been the recent practice.

Private Finance Initiative

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the difference was between the price offered in reaching preferred bidder stage and the final contract price for the five largest PFI contracts let by his Department in each of the last four years; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: holding answer Monday 25 March
	The information requested is shown in the table (all figures are expressed in cash terms). Attention is drawn to the footnotes to the table as a lot of these early PFI schemes changed in functionality terms after the appointment of the preferred bidder.
	
		
			 1998 Preferred Bidder Price Final Contract Price 
		
		
			 Greenwich £15,355,000 (annual unitary charge) £17,327,000 (annual unitary charge)(6) 
			 Calderdale £17,500,000 (annual unitary charge) £14,500,000 (annual unitary charge)(7) 
			 South Manchester £539,000,000 (total cash flows over 45 years) £519,000,000 (total cash flows over 35 years) 
			 Norfolk and Norwich £28,825,000 (annual unitary charge)(8) £35,300,000 (annual unitary charge) 
			 North Durham £14,660,000 (annual unitary charge) £11,960,000 (annual unitary charge)(9) 
			 1999   
			 South Tees £20,300,000 (annual unitary charge) £21,900,000 (annual unitary charge)(10) 
			 Swindon and Marlborough £8,575,000 (annual availability charge only)(11) £10,914,000 (annual availability charge only)(12) 
			 Worcester £15,557,000 (annual unitary charge) £18,302,000 (annual unitary charge)(13) 
			 Hereford £9,471,000 (annual unitary charge) £9,517,000 (annual unitary charge) 
			 King's £6,439,000 (annual availability charge only)(14) £7,211,000 (annual availability charge only) 
			 2000 (only 4 major schemes signed contracts in 2000)   
			 St George's No change in annual unitary charge between preferred bidder stage and final contract price £6,804,000 (annual unitary charge) 
			 Leeds Community £9,090,000 (annual unitary charge) £8,130,000 (annual unitary charge)(15) 
			 Hull and East Yorks £320,000 (annual unitary charge) £1,400,000 (annual unitary charge)(16) 
			 UCLH Construction price for the 2 phases of the development was £153,000,000 Construction price for the 2 phases of the development was £225,000,000(17) 
			 2001 (only 3 major schemes signed contracts in 2001)   
			 West Berkshire £4,019,512 (annual unitary charge) £4,020,000 (annual unitary charge) 
			 Dudley £27,484,000 (annual unitary charge) £25,954,000 (annual unitary charge) 
			 West Middlesex £8,595,000 (annual unitary charge) £8,875,000 (annual unitary charge) 
		
	
	(6) Final contract price includes interest rate adjustment.
	(7) Initial proposal was for all new build; this was negotiated by the Trust to be a mix of new build and refurbished buildings, hence the reduction in price.
	(8) Preferred bidder price for initial specification of 701 beds; final contract price for 809 beds.
	(9) Sterile services was removed after the preferred bidder stage; the design also underwent some changes.
	(10) Project underwent considerable service/build variations before contract close.
	(11) The figures in both columns for Swindon and Marlborough exclude facilities management costs because at preferred bidder stage the range of services to be included in the scheme had not yet been decided.
	(12) The scheme at preferred bidder stage was for the redevelopment of the existing Princess Margaret Hospital, whilst the charge at financial close is for a new build on a green field site i.e. a completely different type of project. The former had a substantial element of refurbished building and was around 10 per cent smaller.
	(13) Incorporates addition of 74 beds at Kidderminster and equipment.
	(14) Includes an adjustment to exclude the benefit of a capital sale receipt of £2.8 million to ensure a like-for-like comparison with final contract price.
	(15) The reduction was due to negotiations with the bidder, reduction in interest rates of 1.7 per cent and the sale of land which reduced the unitary charge by £492,000 per annum.
	(16) The scheme cost increased from £3.9 million to £8.1 million due to inclusion of additional facilities and "hard FM" services.
	(17) Scheme cost increased due to addition of more beds to the scheme following the National Beds Inquiry Report in February 2000.

Private Finance Initiative

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the total savings to public funds of the Private Finance Initiative contract for the Crawley Hospital Energy Management for the Surrey and Sussex Health Care NHS Trust by comparison with a non-Private Finance Initiative alternative.

Yvette Cooper: The Crawley scheme was set in April 1999 on a ten-year contract. It is a cost-neutral scheme (i.e. the costs of the scheme are offset by the energy savings generated).
	The public sector comparator was made and showed the Honeywell Scheme to cost the Trust £400,000 less than pursuing a non-PFI alternative over the life of the scheme.

Performance Targets

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the PSA target for efficiency and other value for money gains in Departmental operations of 2.5 per cent was met in (a) 1999–2000 and (b) 2000–01.

John Hutton: holding answer Wednesday 10 April 2002
	Information about progress on meeting this PSA target in was published in the Department's 2001 Departmental Report, a copy of which is in the Library. This recorded that we were on course to deliver the target.

Performance Targets

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent assessment he had made of whether the target to bring sickness absence levels down to 6.8 days per staff year by 2003 will be met.

John Hutton: holding answer 10 April 2002
	Information about progress on PSA targets will be published in the Department's 2002 Departmental Report.

Performance Targets

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many auditors have been trained since April 2001 in pursuit of the Service Delivery Agreement target to protect consumers through improved food safety and standards.

Yvette Cooper: The targets published in the 2000 spending review delivery agreement were achieved. By April 2001, 6 auditors in England, 3 in Scotland and 2 in Northern Ireland were trained to audit local authorities. Since April 2001, 1 auditor has been trained in Wales and a further 2 auditors have been trained in England, with a further 2 to be trained during 2002–2003. More will be trained as the programme of audits requires.

Departmental Report

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when the 2002 Departmental report will be published.

John Hutton: The 2002 Departmental Reports will be published in spring 2002. The dates will be announced shortly.

NHS Direct

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what is the average time it takes to get through to NHS Direct over the last month for which figures are available.

John Hutton: holding reply 10 April 2002
	The information requested is not collected centrally. However, the average time it takes for NHS Direct to answer the telephone is approximately thirty seconds after the confidentiality message finishes.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Parliamentary Questions

John Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  how many staff were involved in each of the last three years in preparing draft answers to written parliamentary questions;
	(2)  what the cost was to his Department of answering written parliamentary questions in 2001; and how that cost was calculated.

Christopher Leslie: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my right hon. Friend the member for Livingston on 17 April 2002, Official Report, column 929W.

Performance Targets

John Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the target has been in each of the last five years for efficiency savings as a percentage of total running costs for each of the non-departmental public bodies for which he is responsible; and if the target was met.

Christopher Leslie: Details of the Equal Opportunities Commission's expenditure and accounts are published in their combined annual report and accounts, which is available in the Library of the House. Efficiency savings for my Department's Advisory NDPBs are those applicable to the Department as a whole.

Consultation Documents

Brian Iddon: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many of its consultation documents published in 2001 in electronic or printed form the Cabinet Office has monitored and evaluated in accordance with its Code of Practice on Written Consultations.

Christopher Leslie: All five Cabinet Office consultation documents published in 2001 that are subject to the Code of Practice were monitored to ensure compliance with the Code. No evaluation of the consultations has been undertaken so far.
	The Cabinet Office's Centre for Management and Policy Studies is developing a "consultation toolkit" to help officials within the Cabinet Office and throughout central government consult more effectively. It will include a section on evaluation.

Consultation Documents

Brian Iddon: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister which consultation documents published by the Cabinet Office in 2001 were not made available as paper copies.

Christopher Leslie: All five Cabinet Office consultation documents published in 2001 that are subject to the Code of Practice were made available as paper copies.

Consultation Documents

Brian Iddon: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister in respect of which of its consultation documents published in 2001 in electronic or printed form the Cabinet Office allowed less than the recommended minimum 12 weeks' consultation period; and what explanation for this departure from the Code of Practice on Written Consultations was given.

Christopher Leslie: None of the five Cabinet Office UK national public consultation documents published in 2001 that are subject to the Code of Practice allowed less than a 12-week consultation period.

Consultation Documents

Brian Iddon: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister which mechanisms the Cabinet Office uses for monitoring and evaluating the quality of its consultation documents in electronic and printed form.

Christopher Leslie: The Cabinet Office Consultation Co-ordinator monitors departmental consultations that are subject to the Code of Practice and advises officials on compliance when required. The Cabinet Office's Centre for Management and Policy Studies is developing a "consultation toolkit" to help officials within the Cabinet Office and throughout central government consult more effectively. It will include a section on evaluation.

Consultation Documents

Brian Iddon: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many complaints the Cabinet Office has received about its 2001 consultations in electronic or printed form.

Christopher Leslie: Two complaints were received and responded to in relation to one of the five Cabinet Office consultation documents published in 2001 that are subject to the Code of Practice.

Consultation Documents

Brian Iddon: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if the Cabinet Office has published the results of all its 2001 written consultations in electronic or printed form.

Christopher Leslie: Results have been published for one of the five Cabinet Office consultations published in 2001 that were subject to the Code of Practice. Results have been published both in print and electronic form, for the consultation on "The Future of Emergency Planning in England and Wales" (August 2001). Details are available from the House of Commons library and on the Civil Contingency Unit's website at www.ukresilience.info.
	Information on the results for the four other Cabinet Office consultations is as follows:
	Young Runaways (March 2001)
	The formal written consultation was part of a wider consultation process that included field visits, internationally and in England, as well as further consultation with young people through focus groups. The written consultation replies will be reflected in the final report to be published in Autumn 2002 on the Social Exclusion Unit website at www.socialexclusionunit. gov.uk.
	Raising the Educational Attainment of Children in Care (July 2001)
	The analysis of responses will be published on the Internet as part of the project's "Knowledge Pool", which is due to be launched on 23 April 2002. The Knowledge Pool will be on the Cabinet Office's Social Exclusion Unit website at www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk.
	Transport and Social Exclusion July 2001
	The results of the consultation will be published in the Summer on the Social Exclusion website at www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk.
	Licensing of Crown Copyright (HMSO—Cabinet Office Agency) (October 2001)
	The results will be published on the HMSO's website at www.hmso.gov.ukonce the analysis of responses is complete.

Consultation Documents

Brian Iddon: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister which Government departments and agencies have appointed designated consultation co-ordinators in accordance with the Cabinet Office Code of Practice on Written Consultations.

Christopher Leslie: The following departments and agencies have appointed designated consultation co-ordinators: Main Departments
	The Cabinet Office
	Department for Culture, Media and Sport
	Department for Education and Skills
	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	Department of Health
	Department for International Development
	Department for Trade and Industry
	Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions
	Department for Work and Pensions
	Home Office
	Lord Chancellor's Department
	Ministry of Defence
	Northern Ireland Office
	HM Treasury Other Departments and Agencies
	Charity Commission
	The Court Service
	Driving Standards Agency
	Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
	Forestry Commission
	Food Standards Agency
	Health and Safety Executive
	Highways Agency
	HM Customs and Excise
	HM Land Registry
	Inland Revenue
	National Lottery Commission
	Office of Gas and Electricity Supplies
	Office of Telecommunications
	Office for National Statistics
	Patent Office
	Planning Inspectorate
	Privy Council Office
	Public Record Office
	Rural Payments Agency
	Radio Communications Agency
	Valuation Office
	Vehicle Inspectorate

Refurbishment

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will place in the Library the certificates showing that timber used for replacement doors and windows in the refurbishment of the Cabinet Office has been certified as coming from sustainable sources.

John Prescott: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given today by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary at column 1251.
	My Department is currently, with Balfour Beatty, undertaking a full investigation and will report back to the House.

Refurbishment

Llew Smith: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what his policy is on the use of wood from sustainable sources in the refurbishment of the Cabinet Office.

John Prescott: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given today by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary at column 1251.
	My Department is currently, with Balfour Beatty, undertaking a full investigation and will report back to the House.

Refurbishment

Joan Walley: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  what organisation or company provided the certification for the doors and windows for the refurbishment of the Ripley and Kirkland buildings to show that they were produced from sustainably managed sources; and if he will place a copy of these certificates in the Library;
	(2)  who provided, or is providing, the (a) windows and (b) doors for the refurbishment of the Ripley and Kirkland buildings.

John Prescott: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given today by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary at column 1251W.
	My Department is currently, with Balfour Beatty, undertaking a full investigation and will report back to the House.

Refurbishment

Joan Walley: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, 
	(1)  how much has been spent on timber for the refurbishment of the Ripley and Kirkland building;
	(2)  how much certified timber has been used in the refurbishment of the Ripley and Kirkland building; and what proportion of the total timber purchased for this refurbishment this represents;
	(3)  what action was taken by his Department to ensure that timber procured for the refurbishment of the Ripley and Kirkland building was sourced (a) sustainably and (b) legally.

Christopher Leslie: pursuant to the answer I gave on 14 February, column 558
	I regret to say that the information I provided was incorrect. The contract used with the main contractor for the refurbishment of 22 Whitehall (comprising the Ripley and Kirkland Buildings) did not specify that all timber should be supplied from certifiable sustainably managed sources upon which certificates are to be made available. The contract does require that timber for the doors and door frames in the Ripley Building should be "supplied from a certified renewable source. Certificates to be provided." The contract did not specify the source of any other timber to be used in the buildings.
	I provided the original answer to the House in good faith on the basis of information provided to Cabinet Office officials. I am grateful to my hon. friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North for her interest in this matter. As a result of her investigations, we are currently, with Balfour Beatty, undertaking a full investigation in to all circumstances surrounding this matter and will report back to the House.

Civil Contingencies Secretariat

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, if he will list the members of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat.

Christopher Leslie: Mike Granatt is the head of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat, of which there are currently 123 members.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Residential Care

Vernon Coaker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what his estimate is of the number of (a) residential and (b) nursing home places available to the elderly in each of the last three years.

Jacqui Smith: I have been asked to reply.
	The requested information is shown in the table.
	
		Number of places in homes for elderly and elderly -- mentally infirm people EnglandRounded Numbers
		
			 31 March 1999 2000 2001 
		
		
			 Residential Care 265,090 263,430 260,070 
			 Nursing Care 150,370 149,960 142,520 
		
	
	Source: DH Returns.

Dungavel Detention Centre

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  if he will make a statement on the hunger strike by asylum seekers at Dungavel detention centre;
	(2)  how many children are detained at his Department's Dungavel centre; how many of that number have special needs as a result of disability or health problems; and what level of education and healthcare is provided for these children;
	(3)  if he will make a statement on his assessment of the management of the Dungavel detention centre in Scotland;
	(4)  what medical care is available to asylum seekers detained at the Dungavel centre.

Angela Eagle: Dungavel Removal Centre is managed and operated by Premier Services Ltd. All removal centres must provide for the safety and care of detainees in compliance with the Detention Centre Rules 2001. The Rules set out the rights and responsibilities of those held in removal centres and of those who operate such centres. The contract with Premier reflects the requirements of the Rules.
	The number and profile of detainees, including the number of children, at an immigration removal centre changes from day-to-day. Internal management information records that on the morning of Monday 15 April 2002 there were 15 children at Dungavel Removal Centre and of these, two had special needs as a result of disability or health problems.
	A programme of modular education is provided at Dungavel for all school age children.
	There are excellent medical facilities at Dungavel in the dedicated healthcare unit. This unit includes two hospital beds. There is a full time doctor and five full time nurses. There is a 24-hour on call facility to both doctors and nurses. There is a weekly visit by a dentist and an optician visits the centre fortnightly. These medical facilities are available to all detainees including children.
	Reports that have recently been circulating suggesting that there has been a hunger strike by a number of detainees at Dungavel are completely unfounded.
	On Tuesday 9 April a number of detainees announced their intention to stage what they termed a "non-compliance" day. Detainees refused to get out of bed, take part in removal centre activities such as education or sport activities or eat in the centre's dining hall. They did, however, continue to buy food from the centre's shop.
	Most detainees ate lunch and supper the next day and the centre has been operating normally since.

Asylum Seekers

Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many and what proportion of asylum seekers held in removal centres are waiting for an initial decision on their application; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: I regret that the information requested is not available and could be obtained only by examining individual case files at disproportionate cost.

Asylum And Immigration Act

Humfrey Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions there were under section 8 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 in (a) 2000 and (b) 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: holding answer 18 April 2002
	Information from the Home Office Court Proceedings database on a principal offence basis indicates that in 2000, 32 persons were prosecuted under section 8 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996. More recent information is not yet available. Information on the number of prosecutions in 2001 is due to be published in the Command Paper "Control of Immigration: Statistics United Kingdom 2001" later this year.
	The Government set out its proposals for tackling illegal working in Chapter 5 of the White Paper, "Secure Borders, Safe Haven: Integration with Diversity in Modern Britain" (CM 5387). These proposals included suggested amendments to section 8 of the 1996 Act, which now form part of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 12 April 2002.

Special Advisers

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the number and expected cost to his Department of special advisers in (a) 2001–02 and (b) 2002–03.

David Blunkett: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) on 23 October 2001, Official Report, column 211W.
	With regard to the pay of special advisers, I refer the Hon Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 10 April 2002, Offical Report, column 11W.

Secondments

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many staff were seconded between (a) PWC Consulting and Pricewaterhouse- Coopers, (b) Ernst & Young, (c) Deloitte & Touche, (d) KPMG and (e) Andersen and his Department in (i) 1999–2000, (ii) 2000–01 and (iii) April 2001 to the latest date for which figures are available.

Angela Eagle: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 26 February 2002, Official Report column 1266W.

Police Reform

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what powers he will gain under the proposed Police Reform Bill; if police authorities will be involved in directions given to chief officers and in the suspension of chief constables under the proposed reforms; what the role of the community support officers will be; what police powers will be given to accredited persons and what their responsibilities will be; what estimate he has made of how much the proposals on police reform will cost; and if he will make a statement.

John Denham: holding answer 17 April 2002
	I refer my hon. Friend to Explanatory Notes published with the Bill.

Asylum Cases

Humfrey Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time taken was from first application to initial decision in asylum cases in the last 12 months; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: holding answer 18 April 2002
	I refer the hon Member to the reply given on 3 April 2002, Official Report, column 1066W which gives the latest available information.
	Information for the 12 months to March 2002 will be available on 30 May 2002.

Vehicle Clamping

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what estimate he has of the number of vehicles clamped in the last full year for which figures are available; what was the (a) total number and (b) monetary amount of fines levied; what proportion and what amount of the fines levied were collected; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what regulations govern private clamping companies;
	(3)  what was the largest fine that could be imposed in respect of an uncollected vehicle, which had been towed away after it had been clamped, in each of the last five years.

John Denham: There are no regulations relating to clamping on private property and we do not collect any information about the number of vehicles clamped or the fines levied. The Private Security Industry Act 2001 creates the Security Industry Authority. The authority, which will regulate the industry through licensing, will begin operations in 2003 and will have wheel clamping as one of its priority areas.

Experience Corps Initiative

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 25 March 2002, Official Report, column 595W, regarding the experience corps initiative if the initiative has been launched.

Angela Eagle: The Experience Corps Company began this initiative in November 2001. This is across the nine English government regions, seven of which have operations under way. I understand that the Experience Corps Company will launch in the South East, which includes Buckingham, and South West Regions by June 2002.

Yarl's Wood Detention Centre

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his statement of 25 February 2002, Official Report, column 441, on the Yarl's Wood fire, whether fatalities have been discovered since 25 February.

Angela Eagle: No fatalities have been discovered to date.

Immigration

John Cryer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average waiting time for determination of applications for indefinite leave to remain in the UK on the basis of marriage was in the last 12 months.

Angela Eagle: I regret that there are no published data on decision times for individual types of applications for indefinite leave to remain. Our aim is to decide 65 per cent of all straightforward applications on initial consideration within three weeks. Due to the exceptionally high number of applications received over the past year, and process changes which are being introduced to improve our longer term performance, it is at present taking up to six weeks to decide an application on initial consideration. We are working to reduce this to three weeks or less as soon as possible. Information on expected processing times for straightforward cases is provided to applicants on the Immigration and Nationality Directorate web site at http://194.203.40.90/default.asp? Pageld=113

Immigration

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Immigration and Nationality Directorate received the application from Mrs. F. N. M., a Jamaican national living in Aylesbury, for leave to remain in the United Kingdom as the wife of a person with indefinite leave to remain (ref M1005958); when he intends to notify the applicant of his decision; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: The Immigration and Nationality Directorate received Mrs. M's application on 14 February 2000. She was notified on 16 April 2002 that she had been granted leave to remain. I am sorry that this application was overlooked whilst a waiting a hearing date for her outstanding appeal.

Football Hooligans

David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals, by club, who purport to support English Nationwide and Premier League football teams are classified as football hooligans within Home Office categories.

Angela Eagle: Those housed in Accommodation Centres will receive a small cash allowance for incidental expenses, which could include public transport.

Asylum Services (Edinburgh)

John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions his Department has had with representatives of the City of Edinburgh Council following its decision to pull out of negotiations with the National Asylum Support Service.

Angela Eagle: The City of Edinburgh Council has advised officials from the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) that they wish to suspend formal negotiations regarding a contract to supply accommodation for dispersed asylum seekers.

Private Finance Initiative

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the total savings to public funds of the Private Finance Initiative contract for Rainsbrook (Onley) Secure Training Centre by comparison with a non-Private Finance Initiative alternative.

Beverley Hughes: The estimated total savings to public funds of the Private Finance Initiative contract for Hassockfield (Medomsley) Secure Training Centre by comparison with a Public Sector alternative is £29.5 million (excluding VAT).
	The contract was amended on 9 August 2001 to provide an additional 36 trainee places. The estimated total savings to public funds of these additional places by comparison with a Public Sector alternative is £10.5 million (excluding VAT).

Certificates of Identity

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which European Union countries do not accept the Home Office Certificate of Identity as a valid travel document; what reasons each of them has provided his Department for this policy; how he has addressed each of these reasons; when he expects the Certificate of Identity to be accepted throughout the EU; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: The Home Office Certificate of Identity (CID) is a travel document issued to foreign nationals, other than refugees, who are resident in the United Kingdom and cannot obtain a passport from their national authorities.
	The CID is issued on a discretionary basis, not under an international convention. European Union Member States are not obliged to recognise the document. Those Member States which do not do so, and generally do not issue travel visas to CID holders, include France, Belgium, Germany, Greece and Spain.
	The stance taken by all these countries is largely influenced by the fact that CID holders have no absolute right of re-admission on return from travel abroad. In response we have explained that this does not cause difficulties in practice, as CID holders are entitled to return to any United Kingdom port on a date within the CID's validity, and a visa is not required. Under the Immigration Rules, re-admission after examination by an immigration officer is not an automatic entitlement, but would normally be granted, on the basis that residency here is to be resumed. There are no plans to give CID holders an absolute right of re-admission. To do so would put them in a more favourable position than other foreign nationals who are resident here. Only British citizens, and Commonwealth citizens who have the right of abode here, have an unconditional right of re-entry.
	Positive efforts will continue to be made by the Home Office with a view to achieving full acceptance for the CID, including giving consideration to alteration of the standard wording of the CID to meet Schengen concerns.

Documents (Croydon)

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what records are kept regarding the whereabouts of documents sent to the Home Office facility in Croydon.

Angela Eagle: All packages received by recorded or special delivery are recorded on a database on the date of receipt. There is an audit trail of the subsequent movement of those packages. All applications and their movements are recorded on a case information database. Details of the passports submitted by applicants are recorded in their individual case records on that database. These systems are supported by local manual records recording the movement of passports and any other valuable documents.

Leave to Remain Applications

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what monitoring systems are used to track applications by non-UK citizens to remain in the UK on the basis of marriage.

Angela Eagle: All new applications for leave to remain in the United Kingdom, including those lodged on the basis of marriage, are recorded on a case information database, together with any subsequent actions that may take place concerning that application.

Leave to Remain Applications

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time was to process an application for a non-UK citizen to remain in the UK on the basis of marriage over the last 12 months.

Angela Eagle: I regret that there are no published data on decision times for individual types of spouse applications. Our aim is to decide 65 per cent of all straightforward applications on initial consideration within three weeks. Due to the exceptionally high number of applications received over the past year, and process changes which are being introduced to improve our longer term performance, it is at present taking up to six weeks to decide an application on initial consideration. We are working to reduce this to three weeks or less as soon as possible. Information on expected processing times for straightforward cases is provided to applicants on the Immigration and Nationality Directorate web site at http://194.203.40.90/default.asp?PageId=113.

Passports (Return)

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average length of time was for a passport to be returned to United Kingdom citizens from the Home Office facility in Croydon over the last 12 months.

Angela Eagle: This information is not available and could only be obtained at a disproportionate cost. However, United Kingdom passports are received only in those cases where the sponsor is a British citizen and where a passport is required as evidence of that status. They are normally returned with any other documents submitted by the applicant when an application is decided. Over the last 12 months, the majority of applications for leave to remain in the United Kingdom were decided within three weeks, but over recent months this has been nearer to six weeks due to high levels of intake.

Asylum Seekers (Throckmorton Airfield)

Michael Spicer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the additional funding required for (a) policing and (b) fire services if an asylum seekers centre were to be established at Throckmorton airfield;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the additional funding required for (a) transport and (b) housing if an asylum seekers centre were to be established at Throckmorton airfield.

Angela Eagle: In making final decisions on preferred sites, we will take all the relevant factors into account including those to which the hon Member refers. These assessments have not yet been made.

Asylum Seekers (Throckmorton Airfield)

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum cases have been dealt with over the last three years; how many cases have succeeded after the appeal process; how many cases have been refused; how many of those refused did not seek appeal; how many of those denied asylum have been removed from the UK; how many left voluntarily; how many are awaiting removal; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: Information for 1999 to 2001 on applications for asylum, and initial decisions made, is shown in Table 1. However these initial decisions do not all relate to applications made between 1999 and 2001.
	
		Table 1: Applications received for asylum in the United Kingdom, and initial decisions 1  2 , 1999–2001 -- Number of principal applicants
		
			  Applications received(20) Initial Decisions(21) Cases considered under normal procedures(22)Granted asylum Granted ELR Refused Backlog clearance exercise(23)Granted asylum or ELR under backlog criteria Refused under backlog criteria(24)  
		
		
			 1999 71,160 33,720 7,815 2,465 11,025 11,140 1,275 
			 2000p 80,315 109,205 10,375 11,495 75,680 10,325 1,335 
			 2001p 71,700 118,195 10,960 19,510 87,725 — — 
			 Totalp 223,170 261,125 29,150 33,470 174,430 21,470 2,605 
		
	
	(18) Figures rounded to the nearest 5, with * = 1 or 2.
	(19) Decision figures do not necessarily relate to applications received in the same period.
	(20) May exclude some cases lodged at Local Enforcement Offices between January and March 2000.
	(21) Information is of initial decisions, excluding the outcome of appeals or other subsequent decisions.
	(22) Cases considered under normal procedures may include some cases decided under the backlog criteria.
	(23) Cases decided under measures aimed at reducing the pre 1996 asylum application backlog.
	(24) Includes some cases where the application has been refused on substantive grounds.
	p Figures for 2000 and 2001 are provisional and subject to change.
	Information on the numbers of appeals allowed and dismissed at the adjudicator stage is given in Table 2.
	
		Table 2: Outcome of Asylum Appeals at Adjudicator Stage, -- 1999–2001(25)Number of principal appellants
		
			  Allowed Dismissed Withdrawn Total 
		
		
			 1999 5,280 11,135 3,050 19,460 
			 2000p 3,340 15,580 475 19,395 
			 2001p 8,155 34,440 825 43,415 
			 Totalp 16,770 61,155 4,350 82,275 
		
	
	(25)Figures rounded to the nearest 5.
	pFigures for 2000 and 2001 are provisional and subject to change.
	Information on the numbers of further appeals to the Tribunal which were allowed, dismissed and withdrawn, for which data are available, is given in Table 3.
	
		Table 3: Outcome of Asylum Appeals at Tribunal Stage, 1999–2001(28),(29)
		
			   Appellant(30)  Secretary of State(30) 
			  Allowed Dismissed Withdrawn Allowed Dismissed Withdrawn Total Determined(31) 
		
		
			 1999 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2000p 560 730 110 130 115 25 2,635 
			 2001p 1,305 830 100 270 100 15 3,190 
			 Totalp 1,865 1,560 210 400 210 45 5,825 
		
	
	(28) Figures rounded to the nearest 5.
	(29) Appeals to the Tribunal can be brought be the appellant or the Secretary of State against a decision of an adjudicator. The figures do not distinguish and will include appeals brought by appellants and the Secretary of State.
	(30) Total of these figures will not equal total determined in final column as these figures relate to cases for which information is known by the Home Office.
	(31) Based on data supplied by the Lord Chancellor's Department.
	p Figures for 2000 and 2001 are provisional and subject to change.
	Information on the numbers of Judicial Reviews which were allowed, dismissed and withdrawn, for which data are available, is given in Table 4.
	
		Table 4: Outcome of Asylum Appeals at Judicial Review, -- 1999–2001(32),(33)Number of principal appellants
		
			  Allowed Dismissed Withdrawn Total 
		
		
			 1999 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 2000p 365 300 95 755 
			 2001p 260 60 65 390 
			 Totalp 625 360 160 1,145 
		
	
	(32) Figures rounded to the nearest 5.
	(33) Figures refer to substantive judicial reviews (exclude permission applications). The figures also exclude asylum support judicial reviews.
	p Figures for 2000 and 2001 are provisional and subject to change.
	Information on the numbers refused at the initial decision stage who did not appeal is not available for the last three years and could only be obtained by examination of individual case files at disproportionate cost. However analysis of electronic data based on cases where data are available, indicated that around 50–60 per cent of refusals result in an appeal.
	It is not possible to determine how many persons, denied asylum in this period, have been removed or await removal. The total number of asylum seekers (excluding dependants) removed in the last three years is given in Table 5. These figures include persons applying for asylum prior to 1999, and those departing voluntarily. The table identifies persons leaving voluntarily under Assisted Voluntary Return programmes. Others departing voluntarily after enforcement action has been initiated are included within the total numbers removed but cannot be separately identified. It is also not possible to say how many persons depart without informing the Immigration Service.
	Table 5: Asylum applicants removed from the United Kingdom, 1999–2001
	Number of principal applicants
	
		
			  Principal asylum applicants removed(34),(35) Of which, Assisted Voluntary Returns(36) 
		
		
			 1999 7,660 50 
			 2000p 8,980 550 
			 2001p(37) 9,285 995 
			 Totalp,(37) 25,925 1,595 
		
	
	(34) Figures rounded to the nearest 5.
	(35) Includes persons departing "voluntarily" after enforcement action had been initiated against them and persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration.
	(36) Persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes.
	(37) Figures exclude 1,055 dependants of asylum seekers who were removed in the period April to December 2001. Data on dependants removed have only been collected since April 2001.
	p Figures for 2000 and 2001 are provisional and subject to change.
	Information on initial decisions, asylum appeals and removals is published quarterly. The next publication will cover the period up to March 2002, and will be available from 31 May 2002 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate web site at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

Asylum Seekers (Throckmorton Airfield)

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether residents of accommodation centres for asylum seekers will be able to go to and fro as they wish.

Angela Eagle: holding answer 15 April 2002
	I refer the hon Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Edinburgh West (Mr. Barrett) on 18 March 2002, Official Report, column 98W.

Asylum Seekers (Throckmorton Airfield)

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what sum his Department will transfer from its budget to the Ministry of Defence in respect of land vacated by the Ministry of Defence logistics at Bicester if such land is used by his Department as an accommodation centre for asylum seekers; and by whom, and how, such sums have been calculated.

Angela Eagle: holding answer 15 April 2002
	Ministry of Defence and Home Office officials are in contact on this issue, although no agreement has as yet been reached.

Asylum Seekers (Throckmorton Airfield)

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 11 February to the hon. Member for Mid Worcestershire (Mr. Luff), Official Report, column 57W, on asylum accommodation centres, what further sites his Department has identified through procurement competition as possible sites for accommodation centres for asylum seekers; and if he will specify the sites and the criteria used in their selection.

Angela Eagle: holding answer 15 April 2002
	I refer the hon Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Mid Worcestershire (Mr. Luff) on 7 February 2002, Official Report, column 1134W.
	No further sites have as yet been identified.

Asylum Seekers (Throckmorton Airfield)

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in relation to land vacated by Ministry of Defence Logistics at Bicester, what consultations (a) have taken and (b) will take place with members of the local community; and how consultation has been or will be carried out in respect of the proposal to establish an accommodation centre for asylum seekers on this land.

Angela Eagle: holding answer 15 April 2002
	Officials are discussing with relevant planning authorities the best way of consulting the public and other interested parties in the areas identified as having potential accommodation centre sites.

Asylum Seekers (Throckmorton Airfield)

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in respect of the establishment of accommodation centres for asylum seekers, if there will be compensation payable to householders living nearby whose property may be reduced in value as a consequence of the setting up of such accommodation centres.

Angela Eagle: holding answer 15 April 2002
	We do not anticipate grounds for compensation of this nature.

Asylum Seekers (Education)

Jimmy Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what representations his Department has made to French officials on the situation at the Sangatte refugee camp in Northern France.

Angela Eagle: The United Kingdom and French Governments have developed close working relationships at all levels on bilateral asylum and immigration issues. There are frequent discussions of the problems of cross Channel illegal immigration and the situation at Sangatte in particular.
	My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and the French Prime Minister discussed Sangatte and the situation in Northern France during the United Kingdom/French Summit on 29 November 2001. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary (Mr. Blunkett) also discussed the issue with French Social Affairs Minister Elizabeth Guigou on 21 January 2002, and has raised it on a number of occasions with Interior Minister Daniel Vaillant. Officials from both sides are in regular contact on the issue and a Cross Channel Commission subgroup is dealing specifically with the issues surrounding Sangatte. The group met in Paris on 13 February and in London on 18 March to discuss possible ways forward. A further meeting is due to take place in Paris shortly.

Prisons (Education)

Gareth Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much money was spent on literacy lessons in prison in each of the last 10 years.

Beverley Hughes: Information is not collected centrally on the amount of money spent on individual subjects areas. However, the table shows education spend from 1992–93 to 2001–02.
	
		
			 Financial Year Education Expenditure (millions) 
		
		
			 1992–93 £31.22 
			 1993–94 £31.08 
			 1994–95 £36.75 
			 1995–96 £36.95 
			 1996–97 £34.50 
			 1997–98 £36.17 
			 1998–99 £39.04 
			 1999–00 £40.89 
			 2000–01 £41.87 
			 2001–02 £52.60

Special Advisers

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many special advisers there were in his Department; and what their salaries were in each of the last five years.

David Blunkett: holding answer 10 April 2002
	From 1997 to 2001 there were two special advisers in the Home Office.
	In relation to special advisers since June 2001, I refer the hon Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) on 23 October 2001, Official Report, column 211W.
	With regard to the pay of special advisers, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 10 April, Official Report, column 11W.

Special Advisers

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many special advisers were employed by him (a) between 1 May and 31 December 1997 and (b) in each year from 1998 to 2001 inclusive; and what the total amount spent on special advisers by the Department was in each of those years.

David Blunkett: From 1997 to 2001 there were two special advisers in the Home Office.
	In relation to special advisers since June 2001, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) on 23 October 2001, Official Report, column 211W.
	With regard to the pay of special advisers, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 10 April, Official Report, column 11W.